Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Virtual Scenarios for Pedestrian Research: A Matter of Complexity?

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality. Design and Interaction (HCII 2020)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 12190))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

Virtual reality (VR) has become a popular tool to investigate pedestrian behavior. Many researchers, however, tend to simplify traffic scenarios to maximize experimental control at the expense of ecological validity. Multiple repetitions, facilitated by the brief durations of widespread crossing tasks, further add to predictability and likely reduce the need for cognitive processing. Considering the complexity inherent to naturalistic traffic, such simplification may result in biases that compromise the transferability and meaningfulness of empirical results. In the present work, we outline how human information processing might be affected by differences between common experimental designs and naturalistic traffic. Aiming at an optimal balance between experimental control and realistic demands, we discuss measures to counteract predictability, monotony, and repetitiveness. In line with this framework, we conducted a simulator study to investigate the influence of variations in the behavior of surrounding traffic. Although the observed effects seem negligible, we encourage the evaluation of further parameters that may affect results based on scenario design, rather than discussing methodological limitations only in terms of simulator fidelity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Aarts, L., Davidse, R.: Behavioural effects of predictable rural road layout: a driving simulator study. Adv. Transp. Stud. 14, 25–34 (2008)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barr, D.J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., Tily, H.J.: Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing. Keep it maximal. J. Memory Lang. 68(3), 1–43 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., Walker, S.: Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J. Stat. Softw. 67(1), 1–48 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bernhard, M., Grosse, K., Wimmer, M.: Bimodal task-facilitation in a virtual traffic scenario through spatialized sound rendering. ACM Trans. Appl. Perception 8(4), 1–22 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bhagavathula, R., Williams, B., Owens, J., Gibbons, R.: The reality of virtual reality: a comparison of pedestrian behavior in real and virtual environments. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Ann. Meeting 62(1), 2056–2060 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Blower, D.: Key Pedestrian Collision Scenarios in the U.S. for Effective Collision Avoidance Technologies (2014)

    Google Scholar 

  7. Bundesen, C., Vangklide, S., Petersen, A.: Recent developments in a computational theory of visual attention (TVA). Vis. Res. 116, 210–218 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Cavallo, V., Dommes, A., Dang, N.-T., Vienne, F.: A street-crossing simulator for studying and training pedestrians. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 61, 217–228 (2019)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Deb, S., Carruth, D.W., Sween, R., Strawderman, L., Garrison, T.M.: Efficacy of virtual reality in pedestrian safety research. Appl. Ergon. 65, 449–460 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. European Commission: Road safety in the European Union. Trends, statistics and main challenges. Publications Office, Luxembourg (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gold, C., Naujoks, F., Radlmayr, J., Bellem, H., Jarosch, O.: Testing scenarios for human factors research in level 3 automated vehicles. In: Stanton, Neville A. (ed.) AHFE 2017. AISC, vol. 597, pp. 551–559. Springer, Cham (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60441-1_54

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Green, M.: “How long does it take to stop?” Methodological analysis of driver perception-brake times. Transp. Hum. Factors 2(3), 195–216 (2000)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Haga, S., Sano, A., Sekine, Y., Sato, H., Yamaguchi, S., Masuda, K.: Effects of using a smart phone on pedestrians’ attention and walking. Procedia Manuf. 3, 2574–2580 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Hartmann, M., Viehweger, M., Desmet, W., Stolz, M., Watzenig, D.: “Pedestrian in the loop”: an approach using virtual reality. In: ICAT 2017. XXVI International Conference on Information, Communication and Automation Technologies, Proceedings, Bosnia & Herzegovina, 26–28 October 2017. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ1–8 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Jiang, Y., O’Neal, E.E., Franzen, L., Yon, J.P., Plumert, J.M., Kearney, J.K.: The influence of stereoscopic image display on pedestrian road crossing in a large-screen virtual environment. In: Proceedings - SAP 2017, ACM Symposium on Applied Perception (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  16. Jiang, Y., ONeal, E.E., Rahimian, P., Yon, J.P., Plumert, J.M., Kearney, J.K.: Joint action in a virtual environment: crossing roads with risky vs. safe human and agent partners. IEEE Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 25, 2886–2895 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jimenez-Buedo, M., Miller, L.M.: Why a trade-off? The relationship between the external and internal validity of experiments. Theoria Int. J. Theory Hist. Found. Sci. 25(3), 301–321 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kearney, J.K., Grechkin, T., Cremer, J.F., Plumert, J.M.: Traffic generation for studies of gap acceptance. In: Proceedings of the Driving Simulation Conference Europe, pp. 177–186. INRETS, Renault, Bron, Boulogne-Billancourt (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Klatt, W.K., Chesham, A., Lobmaier, J.S.: Putting up a big front: car design and size affect road-crossing behaviour. PLoS ONE 11(7), 1–12 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Maillot, P., Dommes, A., Dang, N.-T., Vienne, F.: Training the elderly in pedestrian safety. Transfer effect between two virtual reality simulation devices. Accid. Anal. Prev. 99, 161–170 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Mallaro, S., Rahimian, P., O’Neal, E.E., Plumert, J.M., Kearney, J.K.: A comparison of head-mounted displays vs. large-screen displays for an interactive pedestrian simulator. In: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology - VRST 2017. ACM Press, New York, 1–4 (2017)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Molino, J.A., Opiela, K.S., Katz, B.J., Moyer, M.J.: Validate first; simulate later: a new approach used at the FHWA highway driving simulator. In: Proceedings of the Driving Simulation Conference 2005, pp. 411–420 (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  23. Neider, M., Gaspar, J., McCarley, J., Crowell, J., Kaczmarski, H., Kramer, A.: Pedestrians, automobiles, and cell phones; examining the effects of divided attention and aging in a realistic virtual reality street crossing task. J. Vis. 11(11), 98 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Neider, M.B., McCarley, J.S., Crowell, J.A., Kaczmarski, H., Kramer, A.F.: Pedestrians, vehicles, and cell phones. Accid. Anal. Prev. 42(2), 589–594 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Newton, P.E., Shaw, S.D.: Validity in Educational and Psychological Assessment. SAGE Publications Ltd., London (2014)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  26. Olstam, J.: Simulation of surrounding vehicles in driving simulators. Doctoral thesis, Linköping University, Linköping (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Otte, D., Jänsch, M., Haasper, C.: Injury protection and accident causation parameters for vulnerable road users based on German In-Depth Accident Study GIDAS. Accid. Anal. Prev. 44(1), 149–153 (2012)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Persson, J., Wallin, A.: Why internal validity is not prior to external validity. In: Philosophy of Science Association. 23rd Biennial Meeting, pp. 637–650 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  29. Petzoldt, T.: Size speed bias or size arrival effect - how judgments of vehicles’ approach speed and time to arrival are influenced by the vehicles’ size. Accid. Anal. Prev. 95, 132–137 (2016)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Petzoldt, T., Krems, J.F.: How does a lower predictability of lane changes affect performance in the Lane Change Task? Appl. Ergon. 45(4), 1218–1224 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Pinheiro J., Bates, D., DebRoy, S., Sarkar, D., R Core Team: nlme: linear and nonlinear mixed effects models (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  32. R Core Team: R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria (2018)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Retting, R.: Pedestrian Traffic Fatalities by State. 2018 Preliminary Data (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  34. Rumar, K.: The role of perceptual and cognitive filters in observed behavior. In: Evans, L., Schwing, R.C. (eds.) Human Behavior and Traffic Safety, pp. 151–170. Springer, Boston (1985). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-2173-6_8

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  35. Sailer, M., Hense, J.U., Mayr, S.K., Mandl, H.: How gamification motivates: an experimental study of the effects of specific game design elements on psychological need satisfaction. Comput. Hum. Behav. 69, 371–380 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Schneider, S., Bengler, K.: Virtually the same? Analysing pedestrian behaviour by means of virtual reality. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 68, 231–256 (2020)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Schneider, S., Ratter, M., Bengler, K.: Pedestrian behavior in virtual reality: effects of gamification and distraction. In: Proceedings of the Road Safety and Simulation Conference (2019)

    Google Scholar 

  38. Schwebel, D.C., Gaines, J., Severson, J.: Validation of virtual reality as a tool to understand and prevent child pedestrian injury. Accid. Anal. Prev. 40(4), 1394–1400 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Schwebel, D.C., Severson, J., He, Y.: Using smartphone technology to deliver a virtual pedestrian environment: usability and validation. Virtual Reality 21(3), 145–152 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Singh, S., Payne, S.R., Jennings, P.A.: Toward a methodology for assessing electric vehicle exterior sounds. IEEE Trans. Intell. Transp. Syst. 15(4), 1790–1800 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Singh, S., Payne, S.R., Mackrill, J.B., Jennings, P.A.: Do experiments in the virtual world effectively predict how pedestrians evaluate electric vehicle sounds in the real world? Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 35, 119–131 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Sobhani, A., Farooq, B.: Impact of smartphone distraction on pedestrians’ crossing behaviour: an application of head-mounted immersive virtual reality. Transp. Res. Part F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 58, 228–241 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Stavrinos, D., Byington, K.W., Schwebel, D.C.: Distracted walking: cell phones increase injury risk for college pedestrians. J. Saf. Res. 42(2), 101–107 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Tapiro, H., Oron-Gilad, T., Parmet, Y.: Towards understanding the influence of environmental distractors on pedestrian behavior. Procedia Manuf. 3, 2690–2697 (2015)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Tapiro, H., Oron-Gilad, T., Parmet, Y.: The effect of environmental distractions on child pedestrian’s crossing behavior. Saf. Sci. 106, 219–229 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Thiffault, P., Bergeron, J.: Monotony of road environment and driver fatigue: a simulator study. Accid. Anal. Prev. 35(3), 381–391 (2003)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Wells, H.L., McClure, L.A., Porter, B.E., Schwebel, D.C.: Distracted pedestrian behavior on two urban college campuses. J. Commun. Health 43(1), 96–102 (2018)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the German Research Foundation (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, project number 317326196).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Chair of Ergonomics, TU Munich, Boltzmannstr. 15, 85748, Garching, Germany

    Sonja Schneider & Guojin Li

Authors
  1. Sonja Schneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Guojin Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sonja Schneider .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD, USA

    Jessie Y. C. Chen

  2. U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command, Orlando, FL, USA

    Gino Fragomeni

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Schneider, S., Li, G. (2020). Virtual Scenarios for Pedestrian Research: A Matter of Complexity?. In: Chen, J.Y.C., Fragomeni, G. (eds) Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality. Design and Interaction. HCII 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 12190. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49695-1_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-49695-1_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-49694-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-49695-1

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation