DP Final

A
Dissertation Report
On
“Empirical Analysis of Pedestrians’ Perception at Undesignated Pedestrian
Crossing Midblock Section”
Submitted By
PARMAR BHAVESHKUMAR NATVARBHAI
(170080713009)
ID NO: - 17TS811
Under the Guidance of
Prof. P. N. Patel Prof. (Dr) L. B. Zala

Assistant Professor, Head of Department,
Department of Civil Engineering Department of Civil Engineering
Prof. H. D. Golakiya
Research Scholar, SVNIT, Surat
Assistant Professor, GEC, Dahod
Submitted to
Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya Engineering College
(An Autonomous Institution)
Affiliated to Gujarat Technological University
In Partial fulfilment for the award of the degree
of
Master of Technology
In Civil Engineering with Specialization in Transportation Engineering
DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

BIRLA VISHVAKARMA MAHAVIDYALAYA ENGINEERING COLLEGE
(An Autonomous Institution)
VALLABH VIDYANAGAR – 388120
MAY, 2018-2019
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that work embodied in this dissertation entitled “Empirical Analysis of
Pedestrians’ Perception at Undesignated Pedestrian Crossing Midblock Section” was carried
out by 17TS811: Parmar Bhavesh Natvarbhai, at Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya
(Engineering College) An Autonomous Institution for partial fulfillment of Master of
Technology (Civil Engineering) with Specialization in Transportation Engineering degree to
be awarded by Gujarat Technological University. This work has been carried out under our
supervision meets the requirement of Gujarat Technological University.
Date: 13/05/2019
Place: Vallabh Vidyanagar
(Prof. Pinakin. N. Patel) (Dr. L.B. Zala)
Head, (Civil Engineering) Principal

(Dr. L.B. Zala) (Dr. I. N. Patel)

BIRLA VISHVAKARMA MAHAVIDYALAYA ENGINEERING
COLLEGE (An Autonomous Institution)
GUJARAT, INDIA
ii
COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the research work embodied in this dissertation entitled “Empirical
Analysis of Pedestrians’ Perception at Undesignated Pedestrian Crossing Midblock Section”
was carried out by 17TS811: Parmar Bhaveshkumar Natvarbhai, at Birla Vishvakarma
Mahavidyalaya (Engineering College) An Autonomous Institution for partial fulfilment of
Master of Technology (Civil Engineering) with Specialization in Transportation Engineering
degree to be awarded by Gujarat Technological University. He has complied to the comments
given by the Dissertation Phase – I as well as Mid Semester Dissertation Reviewer to my / our
satisfaction.
Date: 13/05/2019
(Parmar Bhavesh N)
(Prof. Pinakin N. Patel) (Dr. L.B. Zala)
Head, Civil Engineering Principal


GUJARAT, INDIA
iii
PAPER PUBLICATION CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the research work embodied in this dissertation entitled “Empirical
Analysis of Pedestrians’ Perception at Undesignated Pedestrian Crossing Midblock Section”
was carried out by 17TS811: Parmar Bhaveshkumar Natvarbhai, at Birla Vishvakarma
Mahavidyalaya (Engineering College) An Autonomous Institution for partial fulfilment of
Master of Technology (Civil Engineering) with Specialization in Transportation Engineering
degree to be awarded by Gujarat Technological University. He has published/article entitled
“To Study Level of Service at Undesignated Midblock Sections Influenced by Pedestrian
Crossing accepted” for publication by the “1st National Conference on EMERGING
RESEARCH AND INNOVATIONS IN CIVIL ENGINEERING (ERICE 2019)” at Dr. S.
& S.S. Ghandhy Government Engineering College, Surat during 15th-16th Feb,2019.
Date: 13/05/2019
(Parmar Bhavesh N)
(Prof. Pinakin N. Patel) (Dr. L.B. Zala)
Head, Civil Engineering Principal


GUJARAT, INDIA
iv
DISSERTATION APPROVAL CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that dissertation titled “Empirical Analysis of Pedestrians’ Perception at
Undesignated Pedestrian Crossing Midblock Section” was carried out by 17TS811: Parmar
Bhaveshkumar Natvarbhai, at Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya (Engineering College) An
Autonomous Institution is approved for award of the degree of Master of Technology (Civil
Engineering) with Specialization in Transportation Engineering by Gujarat Technological
University.
Date: 13/05/2019
Signature:
Name:
Examiners

GUJARAT, INDIA
v
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY
I hereby certify that I am the sole author of this dissertation and that neither any part of this
dissertation nor the whole of the dissertation has been submitted for a degree to any other
University or Institution.
I certify that, to the best of my knowledge, my dissertation does not infringe upon anyone’s
copyright nor violate any proprietary rights and that any ideas, techniques, quotations or any
other material from the work of other people included in my dissertation, published or
otherwise, are fully acknowledged in accordance with the standard referencing practices.
Furthermore, to the extent that I have included copyrighted material that surpasses the bounds
of fair dealing within the meaning of the Indian Copyright Act, I certify that I have obtained a
written permission from the copyright owner(s) to include such material(s) in my dissertation
and have included copies of such copyright clearances to our appendix.
I declare that this is a true copy of dissertation, including any final revisions, as approved by
my dissertation review committee.
Date: 13/05/2019
(17TS811:Parmar Bhavesh N)

GUJARAT, INDIA
vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to express my gratitude to Er. Bhikhubhai B. Patel, Chairman, Charutar
Vidyamandal (Vallabh Vidyanagar), for providing constant inspiration and motivation to
achieve our goals.
I express sincere and wholehearted thanks to Prof. (Dr). I. N. Patel, Principal, Birla
Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya Engineering College, Vallabh Vidyanagar, Prof (Dr). L. B.
Zala, Head Civil Engineering, Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya Engineering College,
Vallabh Vidyanagar for providing me an opportunity to undertake this topic for my study.
I express a deep sense of gratitude to Prof. P. N. Patel. Assistant Professors Civil
Engineering Department, Birla Vishvakarma Mahavidyalaya Engineering College, Vallabh
Vidyanagar, and Prof. Hareshkumar D. Golakiya for his extreme constructive support,
constant encouragement, guidance and challenging my efforts in the right direction.
I would like to thank my family and friends for allowing me to realize my own potential.
All the support they have provided me over the years was the greatest gift anyone has ever
given me.
BHAVESHKUMAR NATVARBHAI PARMAR

Enrollment No.: 170080713009
ID No.: 17TS811
M.Tech Transportation Engineering
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATE ........................................................................................................................ii
COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE ......................................................................................... iii
PAPER PUBLICATION CERTIFICATE ........................................................................... iv
DISSERTATION APPROVAL CERTIFICATE ................................................................. v
DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY ................................................................................. vi
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .....................................................................................................vii
LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................ xi
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................ xiv
LIST OF ABBREVIATION.................................................................................................. xv
ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................... xvi
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION........................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 2
1.2 Need for the Study .......................................................................................................... 4
1.3 Aim of the Study ............................................................................................................. 5
1.4 Objectives of the Study .................................................................................................. 5
1.5 Scope of the Study .......................................................................................................... 5
1.6 Study Methodology: ....................................................................................................... 6
1.7 Organization of Dissertation Report ............................................................................ 7
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................. 8
2.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Literature Review ........................................................................................................... 9
2.3 Latent Variables: .......................................................................................................... 26
2.4 Latent Variable Model: ............................................................................................... 29
CHAPTER 3: STUDY AREA PROFILE ........................................................................... 30
3.1 Surat City Profile ......................................................................................................... 31
3.2 Ahmedabad City Profile .............................................................................................. 34
viii
CHAPTER 4:DATA COLLECTION .................................................................................. 37
4.1 Background ................................................................................................................... 38
4.2 Data Collection ............................................................................................................. 38
4.3 Site Selection ................................................................................................................. 38
4.4 Questionnaire and Videography Survey .................................................................... 39
4.5 Data Extraction ............................................................................................................ 45
4.6 Step 1 Questionnaire Survey Form Data Extraction ................................................ 45
4.7 Step 2 Video Graphical Data Extraction.................................................................... 46
4.8 Step 3 Prepared SPSS Data and Variable Sheet ....................................................... 47
CHAPTER 5: DATA ANALYSIS ........................................................................................ 49
5.1 Background ................................................................................................................... 50
5.2 Socio-Economics Characteristics ................................................................................ 50
5.3 Pedestrian Characteristics .......................................................................................... 51
5.4 Pedestrian Crossing Characteristics........................................................................... 54
5.5 Pedestrian Behaviour Characteristics ........................................................................ 56
5.6 Traffic Characteristics ................................................................................................. 59
5.7 Pedestrian safety analysis ............................................................................................ 64
CHAPTER 06 STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELLING ........................................... 73
6.1 Background ................................................................................................................... 74
6.2 Expletory Factor Analysis ........................................................................................... 76
6.3 Structural Equation Model Formulating Steps ......................................................... 80
6.4 SEM Model Establishment .......................................................................................... 84
6.5 Estimation of Parameters for CFA Method .............................................................. 86
6.6 SEM Model Result ....................................................................................................... 87
CHAPTER 07: CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION ............................................. 90
7.1 Conclusions ................................................................................................................... 91
7.2 The Scope of the Further Research ............................................................................ 92
ix
References ............................................................................................................................... 93
ANNEXURES ......................................................................................................................... 96
Questionnaire survey form ................................................................................................ 96
Revised Survey Form ....................................................................................................... 100
PAPER PUBLICATION ..................................................................................................... 102
REVIEW CARD .................................................................................................................. 103
PLAGIARISM SUMMARY ............................................................................................... 105
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Pedestrian Mid-block Crossing ................................................................................... 3
Figure 2 Study Methodology Flow Chart .................................................................................. 6
Figure 3 Sample Size VS Total Popuation .............................................................................. 25
Figure 4 Gujarat State Population Chart .................................................................................. 31
Figure 5 Surat City Map .......................................................................................................... 32
Figure 6 Location of Study at Udhna and Bamroli, Location.................................................. 33
Figure 7 Location of Study Area at Udhna and Bamroli, Surat............................................... 33
Figure 8 India and Gujarat state Map ...................................................................................... 35
Figure 9 Ahmedabad CIty Area Map and pedestrian crossing ................................................ 36
Figure 10 Ahmedabad citymap and Pedestrian Crossing ....................................................... 36
Figure 11 Padestrian Different Charecteristics ........................................................................ 39
Figure 12 List of variables considered ..................................................................................... 40
Figure 13 Data Collection toward Udhna Darwaja.................................................................. 41
Figure 14 Data Collection Toward Sachin, Udhna .................................................................. 42
Figure 15 Data Collection Bamroli Site................................................................................... 43
Figure 16 Data location Paldi, Ahmedabad ............................................................................. 44
Figure 17 Excel Data Entry Sheet ............................................................................................ 45
Figure 18 Videography Survey Data Sheet ............................................................................. 46
Figure 19 Videography Survey Data Sheet ............................................................................. 47
Figure 20 Determined Longitudinal and Lateral Distance using Screen Marker .................... 47
Figure 21 SPSS Data Sheet ...................................................................................................... 48
Figure 22 SPSS Variable Sheet................................................................................................ 48
Figure 23 Pie Chart Show Proportion of Gender and Age ..................................................... 50
Figure 24 Line Chart Show the Education Wise Proportion ................................................... 51
Figure 25 Column Chart of Purpose and Frequency Proportion ............................................. 51
Figure 26 Types of Clothes Wearing Pedestrian ..................................................................... 52
Figure 27 Pedestrian Mobile Phone Using .............................................................................. 52
Figure 28 Accompained Child ................................................................................................. 53
Figure 29 Pedestrian Carrying Baggage .................................................................................. 53
Figure 30 Pedestrian Walking Style ........................................................................................ 54
Figure 31 Pedestrian Initiation Crossing.................................................................................. 55
Figure 32 Pedestrian Crossing Time ........................................................................................ 55
xi
Figure 33 Pedestrian Speed Change ........................................................................................ 56
Figure 34 Pedestrian Waiting time .......................................................................................... 57
Figure 35 Crossing Patterns ..................................................................................................... 57
Figure 36 No of Unsuccessful Attempts .................................................................................. 58
Figure 37 Pedestrian lane Interacting ...................................................................................... 58
Figure 38 Pedestrian Crossing Stages ...................................................................................... 59
Figure 39 Lateral Distance between Pedestrian and Vehicles ................................................. 59
Figure 40 Longitudinal Distance Between Pedestrain and Vehicels ....................................... 60
Figure 41 Pedestrian Used Force Gap ..................................................................................... 61
Figure 42 Preference of Vehicles and Interacting of Vehicles ................................................ 61
Figure 43 Driver Yielding by Lane Change Behaviours ......................................................... 62
Figure 44 Gap Acceptance by Pedestrian ................................................................................ 62
Figure 45 Speed of Vehicles .................................................................................................... 63
Figure 46 Vehicles Volumes .................................................................................................... 64
Figure 47 User’s Perception for Safety Based on Gender ....................................................... 64
Figure 48 Comparision Male and Female Under The Groups and Alone Condition .............. 65
Figure 49 Safety Analysis Based on Age Groups .................................................................... 66
Figure 50 Pedestrian Safety Analysis Based on Education ..................................................... 67
Figure 51 Pedestrian Risk Analysis ......................................................................................... 68
Figure 52 Pedestrian Experienced Rating ................................................................................ 68
Figure 53 FOB or Under Pass Facility..................................................................................... 69
Figure 54 Pedestrian Unsafe Factors ....................................................................................... 69
Figure 55 Pedestrian Aware Law ............................................................................................. 70
Figure 56 Pedestrian Feeling During Crossing ........................................................................ 70
Figure 57 Pedestrian Road Crossing Facility........................................................................... 71
Figure 58 Preferable Distance for Facility ............................................................................... 71
Figure 59 Pedestrian Perception in Different Traffic Condition ............................................. 72
Figure 60 SPSS Mahala Nobis D2 Sheet.................................................................................. 76
Figure 61 Component Matrix Tables ....................................................................................... 77
Figure 62 Kmo Value............................................................................................................... 78
Figure 63 Cronebach Alpha ..................................................................................................... 79
Figure 64 AMOS Software Starting Display ........................................................................... 80
Figure 65 AMOS Data Upload ................................................................................................ 81
Figure 66 Formulating Network .............................................................................................. 81
xii
Figure 67 Variable Entry ......................................................................................................... 82
Figure 68 Developed SEM Network........................................................................................ 83
Figure 69 Select Analysis Properties ....................................................................................... 83
Figure 70 SEM Model ............................................................................................................. 85
Figure 71 Developed SEM Model ........................................................................................... 88
Figure 72 Model Parameter Properties .................................................................................... 88
xiii
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Latent Variables .......................................................................................................... 28
Table 2 Surat city Profile ......................................................................................................... 32
Table 3 Ahmedabad City Profile ............................................................................................. 35
Table 4 Details of the city with Location................................................................................. 38
Table 5 Survey location, data-time & Sample Number ........................................................... 41
Table 6 Component Matrix ...................................................................................................... 78
Table 7 Data Sample KMO Value and Cronbach’s Alpha Value ........................................... 78
Table 8 Assessment of Normality ............................................................................................ 80
Table 9 Estimation Parameter of CFA Method ....................................................................... 86
Table 10 Latent Exogenous Variable Table............................................................................. 87
Table 11 Model Properties ....................................................................................................... 87
Table 12 Estimation of Model Parameter ................................................................................ 89
xiv
LIST OF ABBREVIATION
AMOS Analysis of moment structure
ANN Artificial Neural Network
ANOVA Analysis of Variance
BL Model Binary Logit Model
FOB Foot Over Bridge
GIS Global Information System
GPS Global positing system
HCM Highway Capacity Manual
HPTP Hazardous Perception Test for Pedestrian
IPA Importance Performance Analysis
ITH Integrated Transport Hubs
KMO Kaiser-Meyer -Olkine test
LM Logit Model
LW & GW Late walkers & Green walker
MLR Multiple Linear Regression
MNL Multinomial Logit Model
NCRB National Crime Research Bureau
NLOGIT Nested logit model
PBS Pedestrian Behaviour Scale
PCA Principal Component Analysis
RTA Road Traffic Accident
RW Red walkers
SARTRE 4 Social Attitudes to Road Traffic Risk in Europe
SEM Structural Equation Modelling
SPSS Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
SPT Stated Preference Technique
TCS Traffic Climate Scale
TPB Theory of Planned Behaviour
WHO World Health Organisation
xv
ABSTRACT
Walking is inseparable part of transportation system. Walking is the best mode of
transportation for short trip up to 1-2 km. Due to lack of pedestrian walking and crossing
facilities pedestrian mostly used regular traffic lane. Continuously increase in motor vehicles
increases chances of collision with pedestrians. Pedestrian crossing at mid-block is a common
phenomenon in developing countries. In such scenario, pedestrian safety is an important issue
in most of the developing countries. In developing countries like India.
Pedestrian behaviour is prime important in order to provide better safety to the most vulnerable
road users and to arrest illegal crossing of pedestrians and reduce crash at such location in urban
area. Pedestrian undesignated midblock crossing increases the chance of a crash compared to
crossing at marked or signalized crosswalks. This study presented the result from a
comprehensive study six-lane divided arterial road that run through a high-density urban area.
This study uses the structural equation modeling (SEM) to reflect the pedestrian perception
that affects the undesignated midblock section crossing. Firstly, the pedestrian questionnaire
and video graphic survey is conducted and 1020 response were collected, according to their
perception to investigate its main influencing factors at Surat and Ahmedabad cities, India.
Pedestrian perception data were collected during the different stages of undesignated crossing
including before crossing, during crossing and after crossing to determine the effect of
obstructive, vehicle and other pedestrians on the crossing behaviour. The result of Structural
equation modelling (SEM) showed Traffic Characteristics (TC) has largest effect on the
pedestrian safety at undesignated midblock section, TC represented by the measured variable
like the traffic volume, vehicles speed and lateral distance. Pedestrian crossing characteristics
is second latent variable that influenced the pedestrian safety after traffic characteristics.
Observed variable crossing patterns positively influenced pedestrian safety at undesignated but
low loading indicating the pedestrian safety are not adequately up to the mark of pedestrian
perception satisfaction.
xvi
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
Walking is the most natural and simple mode of movement for humans. All human being are
frequently pedestrians and practically every trip has some walking components. Walking is
sometimes referred to as the neglected mode of transport. Pedestrians can move without relying
on any technology and with practically very less infrastructure. Walking has been an important
form of the mode of transportation from ancient time. Pedestrian is an integral part of the
transport system. Walking is a key element of developing countries. Walking reduces traffic
congestion and pollution, it’s beneficial to individual health and well-being and enhances the
sociability and vitality of urban spaces. India has the second highest population in the world,
where walking is a major important mode of transportation in Indian cities.
Developing countries like India are mostly lacking in providing adequate and properly
designed facilities for pedestrian movement. Walking facilities like terminal, stair, sidewalk,
and footpath, facilities for queuing, where pedestrians standing temporarily such as transit
platforms, elevator and street crossing facility like a zebra crossing, foot over bridge (FOB)
and underpass should be provided. A pedestrian is vulnerable road users and despite there also
are limited representation in traffic events.
Pedestrian flow may be unidirectional, bidirectional, or multi-directional. The pedestrian does
not always travel in clear lanes although they may do sometimes under heavy flow. The
fundamental relationship between speed, density, and volume for pedestrian flow is similar to
vehicular flow. When volume and density of vehicular flow increase, pedestrian speed declines.
When a similar way density of vehicular flow increases and pedestrian space decreases.
Pedestrian walking speed is highly dependent on the age of pedestrians, which are influence
during the road crossing.
Pedestrian is an important element of the transportation model’s system. Pedestrian safety is
an important issue in most cities in the world. Many fatal accidents of pedestrians in the world
occur during road crossing operation.
According to the National Crime Research Bureau (NCRB, 2016) of India. In the year of 2016,
estimated the pedestrian death and injury was 28,434 of a total urban road traffic accident
(RTA).
2
Figure 1 Pedestrian Mid-block Crossing
Total road traffic accident (2015) happens 4,64,674 in which 54.85% accident are happing in
an urban area, then 45.14% accident occurring rural area. NCRB (2016), It has been found that
15.9% accident occurs near the residential area in megacity, and 10.7% of fatal are reported
pedestrian crossing. 5.8% of the accident reported near the school, college and other
educational institution. About 1.25 million people die in RTA around the world every year and
it is estimated that half of these are pedestrians, cyclists and motor-cyclists (WHO, 2015) it is
estimated by WHO (2015) that pedestrian deaths are 22% which is approximately 275,000
deaths a year globally. Road user is having four characteristics which play an important role in
transportation. Such as,
• Physical
• Mental
• Psychological
• Environmental
3
The physical characteristics of the road users may be permanent or temporary. The permanent
characteristics are vision, hearing, strength, and reaction time. The sound of a horn or the sound
of the nearing vehicle itself can alert a pedestrian to safety. Strength of pedestrian is an
important factor which is affected during the road crossing. Reaction time in which including
the perception, intellection, emotion and volition are called PIVE time. Perception time is the
time required for the sensation received by the eye or ears to be transmitted to the brain through
the nervous system and spinal cord. Mental characteristics of the pedestrian are knowledge,
skill, experience and literacy. Psychological characteristics are fear, anger, attentiveness, and
superstition which are important during the pedestrian road crossing. And last characteristic is
environment in which the factor consider are traffic stream characteristics, facilities to traffics,
atmospheric condition and locality. Pedestrian continuously changes their action with respect
to environmental characteristics.
Pedestrian is crossing the road at an undesignated location to access their place of interest.
Even if crossing facility provides, pedestrian chooses to cross the road at grade. Such pedestrian
crossing has a two-fold effect, firstly pedestrians put their selves at higher risk of collision and
disturb regular vehicular traffic and reduce the efficiency of the section.
The pedestrian illegal crossing behaviour is a major fact in road safety issues. When pedestrian
having crossed the unmarked mid-block, section increase the chance of a crash compared to
crossing on a marked signalized crossing. The complexity Interaction between pedestrian and
vehicular traffic increases mostly at uncontrolled mid-block and unsignalized intersection. It
becomes necessary to study the behaviour of crossing pedestrian in order to avoid such risky
operations by pedestrians. Many studies have been reported related to crossing pedestrian
safety, especially in developed countries. There are only a few studies has been reported in the
midblock section in developing countries.
1.2 Need for the study
The rapid industrial growth, agriculture production coupled with a rise in population over the
past decade has contributed to large-scale huge traffic in the city area. This increasing volume
of traffic has resulted, a number of problems like traffic congestion, delay, accidents, pollution
etc.
Walking is an inseparable part of the transportation system. Pedestrian crossing at mid-block
is a common phenomenon in developing countries. Pedestrian road crossing behaviour is a
serious problem at an uncontrolled midblock crossing in mix traffic condition. Due to the
increase in motor vehicles growth, there is an increase in the regulation of motor vehicles only
4
and the regulation of pedestrian is completely neglected. The main purpose of this study is to
analyze the pedestrian road crossing behaviour at the uncontrolled midblock location in an
urban area under mixed traffic condition. Pedestrian road crossing behaviour at uncontrolled
mid-block has modelled in a structural equation.
1.3 Aim of the study
• The present study conducted with the aim to empirical analyses pedestrian perception
at undesignated pedestrian crossing mid-block section.
1.4 Objectives of the study
• To identify the influencing factor affecting pedestrians crossing at urban cross-walk.
• To analyzed pedestrian safety at undesignated midblock section using the user’s
perception and structural equation model.
• To analyzed pedestrian road crossing behaviour with the reference to pedestrian and
vehicle driver’s aggressive behaviour.
1.5 Scope of the study
To study pedestrian behaviour is prime importance in order to arrest illegal crossing of
pedestrians and reduce crash at such location. User’s perception is very much powerful tool to
carry out such behavioural study. Aim to study pedestrian behavior at undesignated midblock
section using pedestrians’ perception.
To carry out Questionnaires survey and video graphic survey. To collect the pedestrian
perception behaviour information in the different area in the city. The targeted groups of people
are covering the different location of Gujarat state. To capture individual variability in age,
gender and education level.
To checked reliability collected questionnaires and video graphic survey data, using the SPSS
software find out the reliability of data.
Based on Questionnaires and video graphic data formulated structural equation model, using
the AMOS software which determined the most influential factor which affected during the
pedestrian undesignated midblock crossing.
present study conducting to analyse the pedestrian perception-behaviour at the undesignated

mid-block section for safety point of view.
5
1.6 Study Methodology: The flowchart of the proposed methodology is given in figure 2.
Figure 2 Study Methodology Flow Chart
6
1.7 Organization of Dissertation Report

• The dissertation is divided into seven chapters; this is chapter 1 which includes the
introduction to the present scenario and details of work conducted and organization of
the dissertation as well.
• Chapter 2 Which represents the past data; it means review shows the past work on
several studies as well as literature on pedestrian safety.
• Chapter 3 describe the selection of the study area for the present work.
• Chapter 4 denotes the details of data collection program. The collected data further used
for data extraction. From the collected questionnaire survey and videography required
data related to various pedestrian characteristics and traffic characteristics. Collected
data to the analysis of the extracted data in order to fulfill the objectives of the study.
• Chapter 5 represents the descriptive analysis of the collected data. The analysis of the
extracted data in order socio-economics characteristics, pedestrian characteristics,
pedestrian behavior characteristics, pedestrian crossing characteristics, and traffic
characteristics.
• Chapter 6 represented the structural equation model, which represented the most
influenced factor during the undesignated midblock section crossing.
• Chapter 7 concludes the dissertation by summarizing the work done here and the final
conclusion.
7
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
8
Chapter 02
Literature Review
2.1Background
A literature review is the foundation of any research work. Doing any research work literature
review is a key element of research work. A literature review is provided with a vision of
research work, how to get your objective of the research. The present study is carried out with
the objective of an analysis of pedestrian's perception at the undesignated pedestrian crossing
at the midblock section. A literature review is carried out based on pedestrian perception and
pedestrian behaviour.
2.2 Literature Review
2.2.1 Modelling the Perceptions and Preferences of Pedestrians on Crossing Facilities
Hongwei Guo et. al. (2014) analyzed crossing behaviour of pedestrian depend upon human
factors and environmental factors. An observational study of pedestrian crossing behaviour
carried out at the urban street. The survey conducted in Zhongguancun Street and Xidan Street
in China. The perceptions and preferences of pedestrians are collected using stated preference
technique. A specific questionnaire conducted the stated preference survey 402 questionnaires
are received. The field survey obtained the information about pedestrians crossing behaviour
and based on questionnaire collect stated preference (SP) data 1158 pedestrians’ crossing data
is recorded. Based on questionnaire data and field survey data formulated model. A
multinomial logit model is developed to describe the perceptions and preferences of pedestrians
on crossing facilities and locations. The relationship between crossing locations and crossing
distances is analyzed by a newly proposed method with the theoretical analysis. The discrete
choice model framework is adopted to describe crossing behaviour. Model evaluation is carried
out by t-test, validating model credibility is estimated choice models and to evaluate whether
or not the model demonstrates real behaviour. The results indicate that pedestrians prefer
overpass/underpass, and most pedestrians consider safety the first importance. In a view of cost
and construction conditions, signalized crosswalk is recommended to help minimize the
pedestrian-vehicle conflicts. The conclusion of the research paper is the MNL model can
describe crossing behaviour preferably. The most influential subjective factor in deciding to
cross at a designated crossing location is the active principle. The most influential factor in the
external environment is the detour distance.
9
2.2.2 Structural Equation Modelling for Pedestrians' Perception in Integrated Transport

Hubs
Jibiao Zhoua et.al. (2016) developed structural equation modelling (SEM) to reflect the
pedestrians’ perception and that affects the level of service of the integrated transport hubs
(ITHs). The passengers’ satisfaction survey has analyzed the perception and investigate the
main influencing factors at North Avenue station, Xi'an, Chin. The questionnaire is designed
to determine the key factors to the pedestrians’ perception, questionnaire survey data input of
the structural equation model. Information of pedestrian has been collected through
questionnaire survey 300 questionnaires samples. The structural model has been formulated on
the basis to satisfaction degree of safety perception comfortable perception, convenience
perception, service perception. Based on the SEM results, the level of service of the ITH is
quantified according to pedestrians’ safety demand, comfortable demand, convenience demand
and service demand. Interaction between different perception and ITHs are explored to fully
characterize the function of the ITH and provide a reference for its optimal design.
Measurement model indicates the relationship between fixed latent variables and measurable
variation. The model evaluated by t-test, modification of the model can be done with a chi-
square test. Result of SEM is showing the coefficient of passenger expectation is 0.9200, and
coefficient of passenger satisfaction is 0.7120. The result indicates there is a large gap between
passenger satisfaction and expectation with a match of 77.39%. The service level of ITH at
North Avenue in Xi'an has yet to be improved.
2.2.3 Modelling pedestrian road crossing behaviour under mixed traffic condition B
Raghuram Kadali and P Vedagiri (2013) investigated the pedestrian road crossing behaviour
at the uncontrolled midblock location in India under mixed traffic condition. The study is
conducted an uncontrolled mid-block location and two-lane per direction two-way road in
Hyderabad, India. The selected mid-block section is 135 m away from the signalized
intersection. The average observed vehicular traffic during the survey at the study location is
4722 vehicles per hour and the mean speed of vehicular traffic was 24.28 kmph, calculated
based on the analysis of the video data. Pedestrians’ and drivers’ behavioral data were extracted
from the video. Data is collected from the video at an accuracy of 1 in 30 sec (0.033 s) using
Snapshot Wizard software. The analysis is carried out by a multiple linear regression model
(MLR model) is useful for finding out the accepted gap size for pedestrians and the pedestrian
decision-making condition is described by the binary logit model (BL Model) was developed
in NLOGIT 4 software. Prepare the multiple linear regression (MLR) technique based on
10
Pedestrian road crossing behaviour at uncontrolled midblock. The choice model has been
developed to capture the decision-making process of the pedestrian. Road crossing is
considered route choice models which depend upon walking distance and time which are
integrated with crossing models. The probability of selecting an alternative (accept/reject) is
based on a linear combination function (utility function). Minimum accepted vehicular gap size
at an uncontrolled mid-block location determined by Statistical Package for the Social Sciences
(SPSS 16.0) software. Field survey it has been observed that the pedestrian jaywalking
behaviour is higher at the uncontrolled mid-block location due to less regulation of pedestrian
activities. It shows less safety at an uncontrolled mid-block location as compared to the other
locations. This study shows the frequency of attempting gap and pedestrian rolling gap
behaviour at uncontrolled mid-block locations increased the probability of accidents. Result of
study is useful for developing models which our findings may be quite useful to the
policymakers to regulate pedestrian jaywalking behaviour at uncontrolled mid-block locations.
2.2.4 Introducing human factors in pedestrian crossing behaviour models
Eleonora Papadimitriou et.al. (2015) developing the pedestrian crossing choice models on
the basis of road, traffic and human factors. A field survey data collected Athens city Centre in
Greece, a questionnaire survey of 75 pedestrians, to analyze travel motivations, mobility
characteristics, risk perceptions and preferences with respect to walking and road crossing, and
opinion on drivers, etc. Analysis has been carried out by two methods in the first one, in which
formulation of mix sequential choice model. Walking and crossing data used to develop mixed
sequential logit models of pedestrian behaviour on the basis of road and traffic characteristics.
Second is PCA (principal component analysis) techniques used to reduce the dimensionality
of the dataset to a predefined number of dimensions or component. The model has been
developed in three steps, first has to determine the road traffic variable that effect on road
crossing choice of pedestrian, second tests a variable reflecting human factor, and last is
estimated human factors as a latent variable. The modelling results showed that pedestrian
crossing choices are significantly affected by road type, traffic flow and traffic control. The
results of the analysis have been shown, a pedestrian crossing behaviour is affected by road
type, traffic conditions, traffic control and pedestrian characteristics.
2.2.5 Modelling pedestrian road crossing at uncontrolled mid-block locations in

developing countries
11
Serag M.S(2014) investigated pedestrian road crossing behaviour at uncontrolled mid-block

in Egypt. Field survey is conducted at nine uncontrolled mid-block locations in different streets
in three Egyptian cities. Videotaped data are used, 30 minutes survey period each location.
JPEG file obtained to help of snapshot wizard software. Data collected video graphically
through is traffic characteristics, individual characteristics and individual behaviour. A
lognormal regression model used to give the normal distribution successfully and determined
logarithm traffic gaps. The equation is determining the traffic gap show below;
Log-Gap =0.520+0.008*VSPEED+0.01*STW-0.064*FATM-0.355*RGAP-0.09*AGE.
In which, Log-Gap: logarithm of accepted gaps;
VSPEED: vehicle speed (kph);
STW: street crossing width (m);
FATM: frequency of attempt a pedestrian makes;
RGAP: the pedestrian rolls over the available gap (= 1) or not (= 0); and
AGE: (Elder = 0) (Middle = 1) (Young = 2).
The mean accepted gap sizes in seconds with and without rolling gap are 2.76 and 5.22, which
are show the behaviour of pedestrians in Egypt is non-compliant and often risk-taking.
In this paper pedestrian decision to cross the road or not is determined by the binary Logit
Model (BL Model). Equation of mid-block crossing choice is
U = - 3.981 + 2.701*GAP + 6.423*RGAP + 3.2*FATM – 0.301*VSPEED,
In which U is the utility of choosing to cross the road at mid-block. Analysis of the BL model
is determined pedestrian rolling gap is the greatest effect on pedestrians’ decision to cross the
street or not. Result of the lognormal regression model has determined the effect of various
parameters on the size of traffic gaps accepted by pedestrians. The result is shown accepted
gaps depend on the speed of the oncoming vehicle. Also, binary Logit model is examining the
effects of various parameters on the decision of pedestrians to cross the street or not. The results
show that pedestrians’ decision to cross the street depends on the size of the traffic gap, vehicle
speed, pedestrian rolling gap, and frequency of attempts before crossing.
2.2.6 Patterns of pedestrian attitudes, perceptions and behaviour in Europe
12
Eleonora Papadimitriou et.al. (2012) analyzed the pedestrian attitudes, behaviour and
perception based on SARTRE 4 (Social attitudes to road traffic risk in Europe). The analyzed
data by PCA (principal component analysis) techniques. The pedestrian attitudes are
determined by PCA techniques on which 33 variables contained in the survey. In result eight
component in which six components are associated with pedestrian attitudes and two with
pedestrian behaviour. The SARTRE 4 are the database, coding of the questionnaire responses,
involved various common questions that all road users had to fill. The SARTRE 4 project is
(SARTRE 4, 2011) deals with road users’ attitude and perceptions in Europe in relation to road
traffic risk. The analysis shows two methods. (1) Principal component analysis for grouping
variables (2) Cluster analysis for grouping analysis is a similar technique to PCA except rather
than trying to group together variables. The result is shown PCA values of the KMO (Kaiser-
Meyer -online)test are 0.867 are more sufficient sample size, according to Anderson-Rubin
study the eight components are uncorrelated, such component is Satisfaction with the
pedestrian environment, Attitude towards penalties, Attitude towards electronic in-vehicle
devices, Attitude towards speed limitations and surveillance, Pedestrian behaviour and
distraction, Attitude towards pedestrian safety design, annoyance with other road users, and
Lack of accessibility. The main conclusion of this paper is how the Europe pedestrians behave
with traffic rules, road traffic environment, attitudes and perceptions towards some important
issues such as pedestrian environment, implementation of safety devices in cars, measures and
penalties on car drivers, and interaction with other road users was measured.
2.2.7 Analysing the perceptions of pedestrians and drivers to shared space
Ioannis Kaparias et.al. (2010) investigates the importance of a certain person, context and
design-specific factors affecting the perceptions of pedestrians and drivers to shared space.
Studies identified the confidence of pedestrians is middle of the success of shared space
schemes. The success of shared space is reducing the freedom of action of car drivers and
increasing freedom of pedestrians. Two surveys are carried out pedestrian and drivers
respectively, collected 920 pedestrian survey forms data and 373 drivers survey data is
collected. Analyzed how each of the factors is influences the pedestrians’ comfort and drivers’
willingness to share space, binary logistic regression is formulated. The STATA 10 statistical
software package is used to perform binary logistic regression and estimate the coefficients of
the resulting logit models for pedestrians and drivers. The result of the pedestrians’ model is
the probability of a pedestrian to feel comfortable moving around a shared space street. The
results are shown pedestrians, vehicle traffic, provision of safe zones and lighting level is most
13
important external (scenario specific) attributes when age and gender were dominant among
internal(respondent-specific) attributes. The results suggest pedestrians feel most comfortable
in shared space under conditions which ensure their presence is clear to other road users.
2.2.8 Perception and Response Characteristics of Pedestrian-Vehicle Traffic Conflict at

Unsignalized Intersections under Driving Distraction
Pengyun Zhao et. al. (2018) analyzed pedestrian-vehicle traffic conflict at unsignalized
intersections to study the effect of driver distractions. In this study taken 46 participants in
which 22 men and 20 women. The overall age of participant 20-55. They used two methods
for analysis, first is experimental equipment and application of software in which driving
simulator used in which study divided two parts: hardware and software and second is the
design of conflict scenes between pedestrian and vehicles. The physiological instrument system
is used to collect and store the physiological signals of the driver during the experiment. This
study focused on the three physiological data respiratory, heart rate, and skin resistance. The
auditory-cognitive distraction task and visual-cognitive distraction task is analysed task in
Driving simulator system. Compare different types of distracted driver conflict perception and
reaction differences in Driving simulator system. Physiological instrument system, driving
simulator system and the eye movement data are synchronized in two form synchronization
before the experiment and after experimental synchronization. Measurement of visual
perception time, reaction time and emotional Perception Time. The multivariate analysis
method is used to explore the effect of different kinds of driver distraction on drivers’
perception and reaction in the traffic conflict. The result shows there is no significant difference
in the visual perception time of the conflict between straight driving and pedestrian conflict.
2.2.9 Effects of installing a marked crosswalk on road crossing behaviour and perceptions
of the environment
Catriona Havard and Alexandra Willis (2012) In his research paper analysed pedestrians’
road-crossing behaviour and perceptions of the walking environment. The observational and
questionnaire surveys are determined pedestrians are significantly more use that location to
cross the road and people feel safer, less traffic and more confident are get the people when
crossing the road after the zebra had been installed. Observational studies have played an
important role is determined to understand of how people crossroads, and explaining how
behaviour might be influenced by various personal and environmental factors. The study is
conducted at the city of Edinburgh, two methodologies are to collected to data, first is video-
14
based observation survey and second is questionnaire survey, around 573 sample data which
take part in the observational survey. Household survey conducted collected 786 survey form.
Analysis of walking speed, waiting time, crossing time, car yield time, crossing patterns,
crossing location, feeling of safety, confidence carried out by ANOVA techniques. Results
show that a targeted before-and-after approach can provide important information about the
effects of infrastructural change on individuals’ perceptions and behaviour, and the
questionnaire survey shows self-reported behaviour more consistent with observed behaviour.
2.2.10 Pedestrians risk perception of traffic crash and built environment features Delhi,
India
Shalini Rankavata and Geetam Tiwari (2016) study are determined pedestrian perception of
getting involved traffic crash during the walking in a different location in Delhi city.
Determined built environment factor affect the perception. Aim of this paper to identify the
various factor which affected the risk perception such factor is age, gender, road characteristics,
traffic characteristics and sidewalk characteristics. In this research first to identify risk area in
Delhi city, then find the high crash location, determine the built environment and traffic feature
which affect pedestrian perception and last to determined risk-based location characteristics.
Data collected based on questionaries’ survey at 45 sites. The help of GIS tools to create fatal
crash density maps, that upload in Arc Map window to creating a density map of a pedestrian
fatal accident in Delhi. The survey is conducted 1003 pedestrian in which 641 were male and
362 were females. And the age factor was categorized into four groups. Based on the literature
review developed two models. The logit model is used to analyze the effect of each variable
with respect to respondent perceived risk for two categorized location. Based on risk perception
result is shown at neighborhood location female having a higher risk 84% then male having
74% risk and middle age people having 89% of the risk. Mann¬-Whitney test is used to
measure the difference between two samples. Result of built environment analysis show 69%
pedestrian maximum risk respect to lack of lighting. And traffic speed was the second factor
34% of the pedestrian risk. There two logit models are estimate and Wald-statics. model one
shows the marked crosswalks may reduce perceive the crash risk of the resident. Pedestrian
higher risk area shows in the second model. Regression models and pseudo-R-square measure
likelihood ratio. The value of R-square predicted the likelihood ratio of the model as 0.415 and
0.127 for model 1 and model 2. The result shows that pedestrian perceives four-way junction
under the flyovers riskier with a signalized intersection.
15
2.2.11 Walkability and pedestrian perceptions in Malang City emerging business corridor
Fauzul Rizal Sutiknoa et. al. (2013) In this paper study Sukarno-Hatta street corridor in
Malang City business corridor based on walkability and pedestrian perception. Pedestrian
facilities condition is not suitable for the pedestrian. In this city, rapid activities at Soekarno
Hatta street corridor are not in accordance with the services of its pedestrian facilities. In this
research walkability level of Sukarno-Hatta Street corridor is determined based on the
pedestrian’s perception of the physical condition of the pedestrian way. Main Objective of his
study to identify the walkability score of Sukarno-Hatta street corridor according to the US
Department of Health and Human Services standards and, identify pedestrian way
improvements according to pedestrian perception. Support activity analysis is used to identify
types of activities that attracted the pedestrian movement, pedestrian movement associated with
land use and system activities. Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA) is used to identify the
interests and the public perception of comfort and of the Health condition of the pedestrian
way. Walkability Analysis of the U.S. Department and Human Services version is used to
determine walkability potential for Sukarno-Hatta Street corridor. Pedestrian movement in the
street is determined based on a survey of age, gender and movement. It’s found that 38.5%
pedestrians at day and the age of 20-30 years-old. and evening, 47.5% of the pedestrians and
the age of 20-30. The result is showing the level of the walkability of the Sukarno-Hatta street
corridor is 52.49% which means the walkability level is medium. Pedestrian perception is
measured using Importance-Performance Analysis (IPA). According to the result of IPA, need
to improve pedestrian ways, Planting plants, Availability of crossings, shade trees, Traffic
management and Parking designs.
2.2.12 Hazard perception test for pedestrians
Tova Rosenbloom and Roi Mandel (2015) Investigated the hazard perception test to analyze
pedestrian perception. Aim of the researcher to develop system trained a pedestrian to cross
the street safely, hazard perception test is based on a computerized system to the trained
pedestrian. Drivers use this system practice to watch various typical road situation when they
feel the dangerous situation to press a key. Also developed the HPTP (hazardous perception
test for pedestrian) for pedestrian, this tool measures the effectiveness on pedestrian
performance in categories of children, adult and older persons. Taken 359 participants in three
different age group child, adult and older ages persons, find out mean average, standard
deviation and range of ages. HPTP test in which shows the four separate video clips at various
16
location in the tv Aviv area, a person is a view by professional photography crew using a
camera that 210-degree field view. The HPTP scores are two-stage show trial stage and final
stage, in result show the gender effect is more in male than female. In his research finding the
HPTP based different age groups behaviour characteristics, in which examine two performance
first are cumulative presses on the spacebar, using the ANOVA techniques result are show the
male participant pressed the spacebar more than a female participant, second is cumulative
presses arrow key test result are similar to the spacebar. The final result is showing a hazardous
condition male are found the higher score of safety then female and age difference are found
when an adult is scoring highest then the child and older person.
2.2.13 Pedestrians’ Safety Perception at Signalized Intersections in Shanghai
Ying Ni et. al. (2017) analyzed pedestrian safety perception at signalized intersections in
Shanghai. They defined three-factor which is influencing pedestrian perception such as
demographic characteristics, situation condition and environmental condition. Using PCA and
cluster analysis techniques to determined demographical characteristics. Situational
conditional defined as per the HCM, a group size, the traffic volume of pedestrian or vehicle,
conflicting motorized is influenced the pedestrian perception. The factor which is analyzed by
regression and Pearson correlation analysis techniques. Environment conditions analyze a
refuge island, crossing length and traffic signal are affected by pedestrian perception. Based on
literature review they conducted the pedestrian perception survey and behaviour observation
at 32 crosswalks at 12intersection in Yangpu campus area in Shanghai when 1286 respondent
to asked to rate their safety perception when finishing crossing from 1 to10. In this research
paper Pedestrian behaviour categorized into three types according to the signal indications
when they enter the crosswalk, namely Green walkers (GW), Late walkers (LW), and Red
walkers (RW). Based on survey data formulated random effect ordered logistics model,
developed equation zz_qik=βx_qik εqⅈk, in which z is unobserved variables, q is respondent, i
is attributes that influence pedestrian perception and k are crosswalk represent. When β is a
vector of parameters x_qik are determined perceived safety when εqⅈk are error terms. Result
of demographic characteristics show no significant impacts on pedestrians’ safety perception,
impacts of age on LW’s perception, the elderly is more perceive unsafe when crossing during
clearance interval. Also found the installation of a refuge island improves all types of
pedestrians’ safety perception, but RW does not feel safe if they need to prevent at the refuge
island.
17
2.2.14 Young drivers’ perception of adult and child pedestrians in potential street
crossing situations
Liva Abele et al. (2018) explore young male drivers’ behavior and scanning pattern. Analyze
approach of a child and an adult pedestrian in the street-crossing situation. Sixty-five male
drivers between 18 and 24 years of age (M=21.91, SD=1.48) participated in the experiment.
All participants normal vision and had valid drivers’ licenses for between 0.5–6 years (M=3.82,
SD=1.35). A fixed driving simulator equipped with the vehicle control systems and the 3D
sound system was used to conduct the experiment. Real-Time Simulation and scenarios are
developed with SCANeR Studio (OKTAL) software, and eye movement recorded with Tobii
pro glasses 2 eye tracker. Driver simulation data are analyzed by ANOVA examine the effect
of pedestrian types and hazardous condition on driving speed. Eye tracker data is analyzed by
area of interest (AIO) which show AIO is the same for adult and child. Results show fewer
drivers responded by slowing down and drivers had a higher driving speed when approaching
a child pedestrian. The conclusion is shown pedestrian behaviour are higher risks into road
safety.
2.2.15 Impact of public lighting on pedestrians’ perception of safety and well-being
A. Peña-García and A. Hurtado (2015) investigate the impact of public lighting on pedestrian
perception a safety and well-being point of view. Based on the literature review first analyzed
the difference between more light and better light, the result is showed various researcher
indicated better light is safer for the pedestrian. And the second factor is analysed in the
research are the colour of the light emitted by public lighting installation. Colour is affected by
financial and environmental. In five sites carried out a scaled survey with 11 questions asked
random selected 275 pedestrians who walk in five streets in the city of Granada. The main
objective of the survey is to determine the relationship between pedestrian preference and
perception and also measured uniform lighting and uniformity level. Uniform lighting level is
measured with fully cosine corrected lux meter. Colour of the light variable is analyzed a
student t-test which shows the result yellow sodium light is more effectively perceived, and
also concluded in research white light is led to higher levels of light pollution.
2.2.15 Pedestrians’ perception and response towards vehicles during road-crossing at

night time
Venkatesh Balasubramanian and Rahul Bhardwaj (2017) analysed the pedestrian

perception and response during road crossing at night time, taken 30 volunteers participated in
18
this study. Six videos are shown to each of the participants. In videos having six submodalities.
All the six videos show each participant on a projected screen in dark test area, at 64.54°vision,
all subject asked to identify the types of vehicles within 35 s of the start of vehicles, and also
measure the time taken for identifying the subject. Used the signal detection theory to
determined correct vehicle recognition %, false recognition%, d′. d′ is a measure of separation
between the means of signal and the noise distribution in the unit of standard deviation. In this
research used the ANOVA test to determine the differences of response time between different
driving scenarios. Bonferroni correction is used to determine the significance level of all the 6
subjects. Result of the Spearman correlation is showed vehicle recognition and false
recognition are correlating with each other. ANOVA result shows there is a significant
difference between response time and six subjects. Limitation of this research is sample size
is not adequate to represent the population.
2.2.16 Evaluation of Pedestrian Mid-block Road Crossing Behaviours Using Artificial

Neural Network (ANN)
B. Raghuram KADALI and Nivedan RATHI (2015) In this paper examined the pedestrian
gap acceptance behaviour by artificial neural network (ANN) model. ANN is determined
various factor which affects pedestrian road crossing behaviour. Data are collected at Worli in
Mumbai city, a six-lane divided urban mid-block section with a median opening. Data is
collected 120m away from the crossing with the help of high resolutions video camera at 4 to
6 pm, two-hour high demand for pedestrian crossings. Data are extracted every 30 milliseconds
carried out with using AVS video editor software by each forward click. Model formulation
needs to standardize the input data, to determined standardized values value for data. The
model result is shown pedestrian rolling behaviour has a significant effect on pedestrian
accepted gap size. The model result is concluded ANN has better prediction with the possibility
to consider the effect of a greater number of variables on the pedestrian gap acceptance
behaviour as compared to the MLR model under the mix traffic condition. The quantification
of contributing variable on pedestrian accepted gap size is easy showed MLR model as
compared to the ANN techniques. So, both models have their own significant role in pedestrian
gap acceptance analysis.
2.2.17 Pedestrians’ Behavioural Analysis During Road Crossing
B. Raghuram Kadali and Dr P. Vedagiri (2012) analyzed Pedestrian road crossing behaviour
and formulated a mathematical model of pedestrian gap acceptance behaviour. A survey
19
conducted at the mid-block location at Ameerpet in Hyderabad. The data is collected video
graphically help of Snapshot Wizard software. This paper is showing the age difference and
fear of falling significant effects on pedestrian crossing behaviour. And also, determined
thirteen factors in survey form which affected the pedestrian decision process. Gap acceptance
model is developed based on the discrete choice theory. A binary logit model is examined
pedestrian road crossings behaviour. Analyses pedestrian gap acceptance used NLOGIT 4
software. Multivariable binary logit analysis is performed in NLOGIT, it's estimated the
coefficients of the linear utility function using the maximum likelihood method. The result
indicates that pedestrians' decision to cross the street depends on the traffic gap, frequency of
attempting gap, rolling gap and vehicle speed. It was found that pedestrians crossing decisions
are strongly associated with the pedestrian rolling gap condition and available gap size in the
traffic stream. It is also found that there is no significant effect of pedestrian physical
characteristics on gap acceptance behaviour.
2.2.18 Analysis of illegal pedestrian crossing behaviour on a major divided arterial road
Khaled Shaabana et al. (2018) investigates illegal pedestrian crossing behaviour on a high-
speed six-lane divided arterial road in a high-density urban area. The study is conducted at the
mid-block section on a busy road in downtown Doha in Qatar. The data is collected on two
typical weekdays, for twelve consecutive hours in each day, using four video cameras. Three
main elements are considered such as Pedestrian Characteristics, Pedestrian Behaviour and
Traffic-Related behaviour. The total data extraction provided 2766 observations of illegal
crossing from 48 h of video recordings over a period of two days. A multiple linear regression
(MLR) model is developed with all important variables to predict the waiting time. The model
indicated that the pedestrians crossing from the curb will wait less time compared to those
crossing from the median. The total data extraction showed 1794 observations of crossings
without a conflict and 972 observations of crossings with a conflict. Only 972 observations
were used for the analysis in this section. The results showed a high number of pedestrians
jaywalking in a short segment between two signalized intersections equipped with pedestrian
signals.
2.2.19 The effect of age, gender and driver status on pedestrians’ intentions to cross the
road in risky situations
Carol Holland (2006) in his research paper used the theory of planned behaviour (TPB) to
analyses pedestrians to cross the road in risky situations. This research analyzed the effect of
20
different age groups, gender groups during the road crossing. Take 293 participants in
questionnaires survey from 17 to 92-year age which is divided into four ages groups based on
difference accident statics. The study shows their no different in educational level in pedestrian
behaviour in any age groups. The questionnaire survey based on TPB road safety related, data
is collected based on three different situations when high traffic in both lanes when a gap in
traffic are get away from the destination, when there is no traffic in the road. Principal
component analysis techniques used, to determine the principal factor which affected the
behaviour of pedestrian and used the SPSS software to determined reliability of survey data.
Formulated a model based on TPB, the result of the model is determined the different ages
groups need various safety aspect regarding them ages, and the woman is higher riskier during
the road crossing than man.
2.2.20 Analysis of Pedestrian Movement on Delhi Roads by Using Naturalistic

Observation Techniques
Abhaya Jha and Geetam Tiwari (2017) In his paper analyzed pedestrian walking and
crossing behaviour on the road in Delhi city. Data is collected camera through, and the camera
is fitted on vehicles. Vehicles drive different categories of the road at different times.
Smartphone-based GPS application is used collected telemetry data. The main objective of his
study is understanding the behaviour of a pedestrian on the road crossing versus footpath.
GoPro HERO4 Silver camera is installed on the dashboard of a vehicle which is used for data
collection. Total 132km drive a vehicle at different two, four, six and eight-lane road with and
without median collected data. Observed data in which 58% data are pedestrian travelling in
the road and 42% observation data are a pedestrian on footpath based on data. 849 number
pedestrians observed, formulated binary logistics model, A binary logit model has represented
the effect of road types, the velocity of vehicles, age and gender in pedestrian. The model used
with SPSS software which determined R² value, chi-square value of sample data. Result show
element of the road which influence of public transport stops, junctions, footbridges, flyover
on pedestrian crossing behaviour.
2.2.21 The mediating effect of traffic safety climate between pedestrian inconvenience and
pedestrian behaviour
Jing Xu Yan Ge (2018) investigated the relationship between traffic safety climate and
pedestrian behaviour. The main objective of his study to reduce the pedestrian fatality, and to
understand pedestrian behaviour. A literature review is shown, to better understand the
21
pedestrian behaviour and risk behaviour to developed pedestrian behaviour scale (PBS). The
survey was conducted in Anshun City of Guizhou Province in China. The participants in this
household survey are neighborhood, door-to-door interviews with local store owners,
supermarkets that have a large flow of consumers, and distributing questionnaires in an office
building of a cooperating local organization. Total of 311 questionnaires analyzed in which 30
household surveys, 27 store owners, 184 consumers and 70 officers. 143 participants were
male, and 166 participants were female, ages ranged from 16 to 75 years, and the average age
of the sample was 33.640 years old with a standard error of 11.589. In his research used
pedestrian Inconvenience Questionnaire (PIQ) is a questionnaire that examines the frequency
which a participant certain problem while engaging with city traffic. Traffic climate scale is
used determined traffic climate in the city based on three scale external affective demands
(TCSe), Internal requirements (TCSi) and Functionality (TCSf). Determined the sample
reliability used Cronbach α which are more than 0.7. The pedestrian behaviour scale is showing
the internal reliability of Chinese falls within an acceptable range: 0.78 (positive behaviour),
0.72 (transgression), 0.64 (aggressive behaviour), and 0.61 (lapse). The result is showing the
means, standard errors, ranges and Cronbach’s α of the PIQ, TCS and PBS exceed 0.7. Most
of the questionnaires and scales in this study fall within an acceptable range, with the exception
of PBSlap. Relationship between the traffic climate and pedestrian behaviour analyses
Pearson's r correlation test, test results indicate significant correlation relationships among
PBS, TCS and PIQ.
2.2.22 Pedestrian risk analysis at uncontrolled midblock and unsignalized intersections
Kodavanti Venkata Raghavendra Ravishankar et. al. (2018) examine the safety of
pedestrian crossing behaviour at midblock and unsignalized intersection crossings at
Thiruvananthapuram and Warangal city in south India. Data are collected video graphic survey
and questionnaire survey. Six-lane road at Thiruvananthapuram, and a four-lane road at
Warangal, each divided by a median of 1.2 m width and 0.4 m width. The main questionnaire
consisted of nine multiple choice questions and one subjective question. Total of 161 people
responded questionnaires survey. Online field survey is conducted through Google forms the
users who are familiar and regular commuters in the study area, 33 people responded to the
questionnaire. Extracted data from the video including demographic features of pedestrians,
social factors, vehicle factors and other pedestrian flow characteristics. Mathematically
analyses of ANOVA show significant influence risks for crossing the road. Age difference
shows the crossing speed are different age groups are different and youth and middle age
22
groups are cross the road faster than elder age, odds ratio statics are concluded middle age
pedestrian are having irregular crossing then youth and older pedestrian.
2.2.23 Pedestrian behaviour’s at and perceptions towards various pedestrian facilities: an

examination based on observation and survey data
V.P. Sisiopiku and, D. Akin (2014) analyzed user behaviour, perceptions and preferences
toward various pedestrian facilities. examine pedestrian behaviour and perception based on
observational and survey data. study area at grand river avenue East Lansing USA. 897
questionnaires form received and review. In which 711 questionnaires used for analysis. SPSS
used to find the reliability of the sample. Result of the grand river survey shows midblock
crosswalk affected the decision of crossing at a specific location. the conclusion is representing
a midblock crosswalk are most influential pedestrian facility. The result is indicating proper
selected of the crosswalk with adjacent land use to more attract the pedestrian traffic.
2.2.24 Structural Equation Modeling for Relationship-Based Determinants of Safety

Performance in Construction Projects
(Patel and Jha 2016) in this research paper identify various directly or indirectly related
determinants and their effects on the safety performance of construction projects. Using
structural equation modeling (SEM), and empirically examines the effect of safety climate
(SC), hazard management (HM), safety budget (SB), safety rules and regulations (SR), and
safe work behavior (WB) of employees and workers on safety performance (SP) of projects.
A questionnaire survey was conducted, and 230 responses were collected from different types
of construction projects across India. The results provide evidence that safety climate, safety
budget, and hazard management positively influence safe work behavior of employees and the
safety performance of the project. SEM findings demonstrate that implementation of safety
rules and regulations are positively but weakly related to safe work behavior of employees,
although they positively and more strongly influence the safety performance of the project.
2.2.25 Modelling Perceived Pedestrian Level of Service of Sidewalks: An Application of

Structural Equation Modelling
(Sapnani and Parida et. al. 2016) identify the most influential built environment factors on
the perceived level of service of sidewalks in Thiruvananthapuram city, Kerala, India, and
understand which unobserved latent variables are constituting to the main characteristics of
PLOS. Personal interviews were conducted for sidewalks from ten zones of the
23
Thiruvananthapuram city. The minimum number of sample size obtained is 384 and about 502
responses collected from various households, offices and public spaces. Collected socio-
demographic characteristics, walk characteristics, pedestrians’ level of agreement/satisfaction
information. The Security construct has the largest effect on the PLOS, represented by the
measured variables like the presence of CCTV cameras, police patrolling and the street
lighting.
2.2.26 ROBERT V. KREJCIE and DARYLE W. MORGAN
In this paper determined the sample sized for research work showing the graph and table.
N S N S N S N S N S
10 10 110 86 300 176 900 274 3500 346
15 14 120 92 320 181 950 275 4000 351
25 19 130 103 340 186 1000 279 4500 354
30 24 140 108 360 191 1100 282 5000 357
35 28 150 113 380 196 1200 291 5500 361
40 32 160 118 400 201 1300 297 6000 362
45 36 170 123 420 205 1400 302 7000 364
50 40 180 127 440 210 1500 306 8000 367
55 48 190 132 460 214 1600 310 9000 369
60 52 200 136 480 217 1700 313 10000 370
65 56 210 140 500 226 1800 317 15000 373
70 59 220 144 550 234 1900 320 20000 377
75 63 230 148 600 242 2000 322 30000 379
80 66 240 152 650 243 2200 331 40000 380
85 70 250 155 700 254 2400 333 50000 381
90 73 260 159 750 260 2600 335 75000 382
95 76 270 162 800 265 2800 338 1000000 384
100 80 280 165 850 269 3000 341
When N is NUMBER of POPULATION & S is Sample Size
24
Sample Size
450
400
350
300
Sample size
250
200
150
100
50
0
50 500 5000 50000 500000
Number of Population
Figure 3 Sample Size VS Total Popuation
25
2.3 Factors Related to pedestrian crossing in Literature

Latent variables:
Factor Indicator Description References
SE1 (Age) Pedestrian age (Kadali and Vedagiri 2013),

(Sisiopiku and Akin2003),
SE2 (Gender) Pedestrian gender
(Papadimitriou et al. 2016),
SE3 (Education) Pedestrian’s education
(Shaaban.et al. 2018), (Rankavat
Socio- level, and Tiwari 2016), (Ni et al. 2017),
economics SE4 (Purpose) Cross the road for (Peña-García et al. 2016),
Characteristics work, education, (Balasubramanian and Bhardwaj
2018), (Serag.M.S 2014),
(SE) recreational or other
(Havard and Willis 2012),
purpose,
(Ravishankar and Nair 2018),
SE5 (Frequency No’s of times to cross (Ābele et al. 2018), (Rosenbloom
of road crossing) the lane shoe the et al. 2015), (Xu et al. 2018),
frequency (Kaparias et al. 2012), (Kadali

and Vedagiri 2012).
Pedestrian PC1 (Dressing) Pedestrian wearing, (Rankavat and Tiwari
2016),(Kadali and Vedagiri 2013),
Characteristics
(Kaparias et al. 2012), (Kadali and
(PC) PC2 (Mobiles Pedestrian using
Vedagiri 2012).
use) his/her phone while
crossing,
PC3 During the crossing
(Accompanied carrying the child,
child)
PC4 (Carrying Pedestrian carrying
baggage) bags while crossing or
not
PBC1(Group Pedestrians crossing (Ni et al. 2017), (Havard and
Willis 2012), (Rosenbloom et al.
sizes) himself or in a group,
2015), (Xu et al. 2018), (Kadali
Pedestrian PBC2(Waiting Time spent at the curb
and Vedagiri 2012), (Sisiopiku
Behavioral times) or median waiting for and Akin 2003), (Serag.M.S 2014)
Characteristics a suitable gap to cross, (Ni et al. 2017).
26
(PBC) PBC3(Walking Run Pedestrian

style) walking style
(walking or running)
while crossing,
PBC4(No of Number An
unsuccessful unsuccessful attempt
attempts) occurs when a
pedestrian tries to
cross the road and
comes back due to
safety concerns,
PBC5 (Force gap Pedestrian crossing
accepted) from the median or
curb Waiting,
PBC6(Pedestrian Pedestrian actual
perceived taken time for
crossing time) crossing lane
PCC1(Crossing Pedestrian crossing (Shaaban et al. 2018), (Kadali and
Vedagiri 2013), (Papadimitriou et
patterns) patterns show, its
al. 2016), (Serag.M.S 2014),
perpendicular, rolling,
(Ravishankar and Nair 2018).
zigzag or oblique
PCC2 (Crossing Pedestrian take time
time) for crossing the road
Pedestrian PCC3(Lane Pedestrian interacted
Crossing interacting) with traffic during a
Characteristics road crossing,
PCC4(Lateral Lateral distance shows
(PCC) distance from the vertical distance
vehicle) between pedestrian
and vehicle
PCC5(Longitudin Longitudinal distance
al distance from shows the horizontal
vehicle)
27
distance between
pedestrian and vehicle
PCC6 Pedestrian crossing in

(Pedestrians speed the presence of a
change) vehicle or not
Pedestrian path,
Traffic TC1 (Vehicles It shows effect of (Papadimitriou et al. 2013),
(Shaaban et al. 2018), (Rankavat
characteristics types) different vehicles in
and Tiwari 2016), (Papadimitriou
(TC) pedestrians,
et al. 2016),(Kadali and Vedagiri
TC2(Vehicles during the road 2013), (Ravishankar and Nair
yielding by lane crossing vehicle 2018), (Kaparias et al. 2012),
change) change their lane or (Kadali and Vedagiri 2013)
TC3(Vehicles speed,
yielding by speed
change)
TC4(Vehicles effected vehicles
speed) speed and Traffic
TC5(Traffic volume,
volume)
Table 1 Latent Variables
28
2.4 Latent variable Model:
Figure 4 Latent Variables Models
29
CHAPTER 3: STUDY AREA PROFILE
30
CHAPTER 3
STUDY AREA PROFILE
3.1 Surat City Profile
Surat is founded by a Brahmin named Gopi, who named the area Suryapur. In the 12th and
15th centuries. Surat was plundered by Muslims. In 1512 and again in 1530, Surat was ravaged
by the Portuguese Empire. The city is located 284 kilometres (176 mi) south of the state
capital, Gandhinagar; 265 kilometres (165 mi) south of Ahmedabad; and 289 kilometres
(180 mi) north of Mumbai. The city centre is located on the Tapti River, close to the Arabian
Sea.
Population 2018
6000000 5577940
4970002
Number of Populations
5000000
4000000
3000000
2000000 1670806
1227463
1000000
0
Ahmedabad Surat Vadodara Rajkot
City
Figure 4 Gujarat State Population Chart
Surat was the world's 4th-fastest growing city in 2016 according to a study conducted by
the City Mayors Foundation. The city registered annualised GDP growth rate of 11.5% over
the seven fiscal years between 2001 and 2008. Surat was awarded "best city" by the Annual
Survey of India's City-Systems (ASICS) in 2013. Surat is selected as the first smart IT city in
India which is being constituted by the Microsoft CityNext Initiative tied up with IT services
majors Tata Consultancy Services and Wipro. The city has 2.97 million internet users, about
65% of the total population. Surat was selected in 2015 for an IBM Smarter Cities
Challenge grant. Surat has been selected as one of twenty Indian cities to be developed as
a smart city under PM Narendra Modi's flagship Smart Cities Mission. In 2010, Surat was the
3rd "cleanest city of India" according to the Indian Ministry of Urban Development. The Surat
city profile is given in table 2 and location map in figure 5. The pedestrian study location is
presented in figure 6 and figure 8.
31
Co-ordinates 21°10′N 72°50′E
Area 235 Sq.km
Population 4.97 million
Density 14,000/km2 (35,000/sq. mi)
Literacy Rate 86.65%
Average Annual Rainfall 1202.9 mm
Table 2 Surat city Profile
Figure 5 Surat City Map
32
Figure 6 Location of Study at Udhna and Bamroli, Location
Figure 7 Location of Study Area at Udhna and Bamroli, Surat
33
Surat ranked 10th in India with a GDP of 2.60 lakh crore in the fiscal year 2016 ($14 billion in
2010). Surat GDP in 2020 will be around $57 billion estimated by The City Mayors
Foundation, an international think tank on urban affairs. Surat has a tropical savanna climate,
moderated strongly by the Sea to the Gulf of Cambay. The summer begins in early March and
lasts until June. April and May are the hottest months, the average maximum temperature being
37 °C (99 °F).
Surat is a major hub of diamond cutting and polishing. Currently, most of the diamond
polishing workshops are running in the Varachha area of Surat, mostly by the people of
the Patel community. Since it is known for producing textiles, including silk, Surat is known as
the textile hub of the nation or the Silk City of India. It is very famous for its cotton mills
and Surat Zari Craft. Surat is the biggest center of MMF (man-made fiber) in India. It has a total
of 381 dyeing and printing mills and 41,100 power loom units. There are over a hundred
thousand units and mills in total. The overall annual turnover is around 5 billion rupees. There
are many SME Domestic IT Companies present in Surat. MNC IT companies like IBM, HCL
have satellite or virtual branches in Surat. In 2011 Surat hosted India's first Microsoft
DreamSpark Yatra (a tech event) with speakers from Microsoft Headquarters at Redmond,
Washington. The event was organized by Ex-Microsoft Student Partner Samarth Zankharia.
3.2 Ahmedabad City Profile

Ahmedabad also was known as Amdavad or Karnavati (historically), is the largest city and
former capital of Gujarat, which is a state in India. It is the administrative headquarters of the
Ahmedabad district and the seat of the Gujarat High Court. Ahmedabad also was known as
Amdavad or Karnavati (historically). Ahmedabad has emerged as an important economic and
industrial hub in India. It is the second largest producer of cotton in India, and exchange is the
country’s second oldest. Cricket is a popular sport in Ahmedabad, which house the 54,000 seats
Sardar Patel Stadium. The effect tertiary sector activities such as commerce, communication
and construction. Ahmedabad’s increasing population has resulted in an increase in the
construction and housing industries resulting in the recent development of skyscrapers. In
2010, Ahmedabad was ranked third in Forbes’s list of the fastest growing city of the decade.
In 2012, The Time of India chose Ahmedabad as Indian best city to live in. As of 2014,
Ahmedabad’s estimated gross domestic product was $64 billion. Ahmedabad has been selected
as one of the hundred Indian cities to developed as a smart city under the government of
Indian’s flagship Smart Cities Mission. In July 2017, the Historic City of Ahmedabad or Old
34
Ahmedabad was declared as Indian’s first UNESCO World Heritage City. The profile of city
is given below in table 3.
Co-ordinates 23.03° N 72.58° e

Area 466 Sq.km
Population 5.57 million
Density (persons/sq.km) 11948/Sq.km
Literacy Rate 89.60%
Average Annual Rainfall 800mm
Table 3 Ahmedabad City Profile
Ahmedabad has a hot, semi-arid climate, with marginally less rain than required for a tropical
savanna climate. There are three main seasons: summer, monsoon and winter. Aside from the
monsoon season, the climate is extremely dry. The weather is hot from March to June; the
temperature average summer maximum is 43 °C (109°F), and the average minimum is 24 °C
(75°F). From November to February, the average maximum temperature is 30 °C (86°), the
average minimum is 13°C (55°F), and the climate is extremely dry. Cold northerly winds are
responsible for a mild chill in January. The southwest monsoon brings a humid climate from
mid-June to mid-September. The average annual rainfall is about 800 millimetres (31 in), but
infrequent heavy torrential rains cause local rivers to flood and it is uncommon for droughts to
occur when the monsoon does not extend as far west as usual. The highest temperature in the
city recorded on 18 and 19 May 2016 which is 50 °C (122 °F). The Ahmedabad city location
map is given in figure and study location details provided in figure 9.
Figure 8 India and Gujarat state Map
35
Figure 9 Ahmedabad CIty Area Map and pedestrian crossing
36
CHAPTER 4:DATA COLLECTION
37
CHAPTER 04: DATA COLLECTION
CHAPTER 4
DATA COLLECTION
4.1 Background
For the present study, the data collection is conducted in Surat city and Ahmedabad city. Field
studies are carried out to assess the present condition of the pedestrian at undesignated road
crossing. The pedestrians’ safety, and its behaviour studies so that one can take traffic
management decisions to improve the pedestrian facility and traffic performance.
4.2 Data collection

The main purpose of data collection is collecting all required information from all the relevant
sources to find answers to the research problem. Gaining information from respondents via
face-to-face mediums is much more effective than the other mediums because respondents
usually tend to trust the surveyors and provide honest and clear feedback about the subject in-
hand. Researchers can easily identify whether their respondents are uncomfortable with the
asked questions and can be extremely productive in case there are sensitive topics involved in
the discussion.in this research, the data is collected following two methods and the locations
shown in table 4.
(1) Questionnaire survey and
(2) Videography survey
Sr. No. Location Name City No. of Lanes

1 Udhna Surat Six Lanes
2 Bamroli Surat Six Lanes
3 Paldi Area Ahmedabad Six Lanes
Table 4 Details of the city with Location
4.3 Site selection

This study was conducted in two metro cities in India. Where almost major pedestrian fatalities
occur (NCRB,2016). The selected site is an uncontrol midblock location and three-lane per
direction two-way road in Surat and Ahmedabad cities, India. Udhna and Bamroli are located
in Surat city. Paldi site is located in Ahmedabad city. The observation recorded from an
undesignated midblock section on a busy road in both cities. The studied road is a major six-
lane divided arterial road with many businesses, educational and bank on both sides. It has an
38
adequate volume of the pedestrian as well as vehicular traffic to allow for collecting pedestrian
behaviour and crossing characteristics data using questionnaire and video graphic survey.
This study is performing two cities in three different locations. When in Surat city at which
Udhna and Bamroli two location survey is performed. When at Udhna location, where the
survey is performed at distance to the foot over bridge is about 300 to 500-meter distance.
When in Bamroli survey location to fly over bridge approximately 150 to 200-meter distance.
In Ahmedabad city at Paldi area is surveyed location, and survey location to Paldi Char Rasta
(Paldi intersection) is around 100 to 150-meter distances.
4.4 Questionnaire and videography survey
Questionnaire and videography survey are conducted in Surat and Ahmedabad city. In Surat
city, the survey was performed at Udhna and Bamroli area and in Ahmedabad, the survey was
performed at Paldi area in the city. In each city collected 510 pedestrians’ samples, to ask
question her/him which printed in the pre-defined questionnaire survey form. Questionnaire
survey helps to measure various pedestrian behavioural characteristics which show in the
below figure 11.
Figure 11 Padestrian Different Charecteristics
When every information of pedestrian is not collected through a questionnaire form, pedestrian
exactly behaviour during the crossing recorded in a video camera. When videography has
carried both cities at the selected undesignated midblock location during the working day in
39
normal weather condition. The camera is placed on the building terrace. The video camera
viewed a total of 30 to 50 m lengths in a longitudinal direction. So, videography recording is
determined how much time took pedestrian during the crossing, waiting time, no of road
crossing, force gap, vehicles volume, vehicles speed, vehicles preference, etc, data was
collected through videography. When traffic characteristics data is collected with the help of
videography and other pedestrian behaviour characteristics data is collected with the help of
questionnaire form.
When pedestrian safety and attitude is determined by Likert five scale, following below
question is asked for pedestrian and take her/his response regarding safety and attitude.
• How safe you feel when you cross the road at undesignated crossing section?
• How safe you feel when you are alone?
• How safe you feel when you are in a group?
• Rate the risk you have taken during the crossing at the cross-walk?
• How do you feel when you cross the road at cross-walk?
Following variable as shown in figure12 is considered in questionnaire form and videography

at four locations as shown in table5.
Figure 12 List of variables considered
40
Sr. Section Name Date of Survey Total time No of Samples

No. duration
1 Udhna (Amber Colony) 11/12/2018 8 hrs. 280
2 Bamroli (Piyush Point) 12/12/2018 8 hrs. 230
3 Paldi 22/12/2018 10 hrs. 420
4 Paldi 31/10/2018 4hrs 74
Table 5 Survey location, data-time & Sample Number
Figure 13 Data Collection toward Udhna Darwaja
41
Figure 14 Data Collection Toward Sachin, Udhna
42
Figure 15 Data Collection Bamroli Site, Surat
43
Figure 16 Data location Paldi, Ahmedabad
44
4.5 Data Extraction

In this study after the data collection to carried out the data extraction work.
4.6 Step 1 Questionnaire survey form data extraction
After the data collection to carried out the data extraction work. All question answer in survey
form to coded, like gender is coded a 0 is male and 1 is female. So, easily data extraction work
is done. In Excel to enter all the question of the survey form and all question answer entry in
coding. So, data extraction work is easily completed. Total 1020 questionnaire survey form
response is taken both cities, in which some question form is not full filled due to pedestrian
urgency so in which total 891 survey form is filled with all data entry in Excel sheet.
Figure 17 Excel Data Entry Sheet
45
4.7 Step 2 Video graphical data extraction

When every information not be asked to pedestrian and also questionnaire survey form having
many questions in form and pedestrian are not responding to many questions. Based on this
thinking some question is not printed in form but we easily extracted through video such as
dressing, mobile used, no of attempts, waiting time & crossing time, force gap, vehicle volume
and speed, and longitudinal as well as lateral distance easily extracted. Vehicle volume is
counted per 30 seconds when pedestrian standing on midblock or curb and starting to cross the
road lane. During the crossing which vehicle interact with a pedestrian that vehicle speed is
finding. Screen marker tool used to determine the longitudinal and lateral distance between
pedestrian to vehicles. A 30-meter distance marks on both roads in the longitudinal direction,
so help of screen marker tool to determine the pedestrian longitudinal distance. You know the
road lateral length so finding the pedestrian lateral distances.
Videography through data extraction excel sheet:
Figure 18 Videography Survey Data Sheet
46
Figure 19Videography Survey Data Sheet
Figure 20Determined Longitudinal and Lateral Distance using Screen Marker
4.8 Step 3 Prepared SPSS Data and Variable Sheet

After the excel data entry prepared SPSS coding sheet.
47
Figure 21 SPSS Data Sheet
Figure 22 SPSS Variable Sheet
48
CHAPTER 5: DATA ANALYSIS
49
CHAPTER 5
DATA ANALYSIS
5.1 Background
In this study after the data collection and extraction statically or graphically analysis is carried
out. Data analysis is carried out in Microsoft Excel. This chapter discusses the graphically
represented pedestrian safety and various other comparative analysis between selected study
areas.
5.2 Socio-Economics Characteristics

Gender and Age:
Gender Age
<20
>50 8%
17%
Female,
381,
44%
40-50
Male, 17%
487, 20-30
56% 41%
30-40
17%
Male Female <20 20-30 30-40 40-50 >50
Figure 23 Pie Chart Show Proportion of Gender and Age

The total data extraction showed 1020 survey form in which only 868 question form was used
for the analysis in this study. Out of the 868-response recorded, 487 were male and 381 were
females. Age factor was categorized into five groups 20-year (74), 20-40-year (352), 30-40-
year (173), 40-50-year (118) pedestrian and above 50-year (151) pedestrians.
Education:
A total of 868 pedestrian response were surveyed. Education was categorized into five groups
- less than SSC (90), SSC (393), HSC (192), Graduated (116) and above graduated (77).
50
Education
450 393
400
No' of Pedestrians
350
300
250 192
200
150 116
90 77
100
50
0
GRADUATIO
< SSC SSC HSC ABOVE GRAD
N
90 393 192 116 77
Education
Figure 24 Line Chart Show the Education Wise Proportion
Purpose and Frequency:
Purpose Frequency
500 484 800 730
450
700
400
600
No' of Pedestrians
350
500
No' of pedestrians
300
246 400
250
300
200
200
150 126
89 100
100 12
49 0
50
Frequency
Purpose
Figure 25 Column Chart of Purpose and Frequency Proportion

A 475 pedestrian respondent have work based purpose journey. A 246 pedestrian have
educational purpose journey. Therefore, 730 pedestrians having a daily journey and cross the
undesignated midblock section daily. When 138 pedestrians having occasionally trips.
5.3 Pedestrian Characteristics
Dressing: A total of 868 respondents in which 487 male and 381 female respondents.
51
Dressing
500 470
450
400
No' of pedestrians
350
300
250
200
150 132 118 113
100
50 17
0
Normal Traditional Casual Punjabi Saree
Male Femlae
Dressing
Figure 26 Types of Clothes Wearing Pedestrian
470 male respondents’wearing normal dresses (shirt pant) and 17 respondents wearing
traditional (dhoti kurta) clothe. 132 female respondents wearing casual clothing, 118 female,
wear Punjabi dress and 113 female wearing saree.
Mobile Phone Used
Mobile use
900 818
800
700
No' of pedestrians
600
500
400
300
200
100 50
0
Yes No
Mobile Used
Figure 27 Pedestrian Mobile Phone Using
A total of 868 respondents in 50 respondents of using the mobile phone during the road
crossing.
52
Accompanied child:
Accompanied child
900
800 763
700
No ' of pedestrians
600
500
400
300
200
105
100
0
Yes No
Accompained child
Figure 28 Accompained Child
105 respondents have carried an accompanied child.
Carrying baggage:
Carrying baggage
500 451
450
No' of pedestrians
400 360
350
300
250
200
150
100 57
50
0
One hand Two hand
yes No
Carring Baggage
Figure 29 Pedestrian Carrying Baggage
A total of 868 respondents in 508 respondents carry baggage in one hand and 57 respondents
carry baggage in both hands. 360 respondents do not carry any kind of baggage.
53
5.4 Pedestrian Crossing Characteristics

Walking style: Four broad categories were observed for pedestrians walking style, including
walking, walking + run, Brisk walk, Run, and Run + walk. A less than 20 age of pedestrian
was observed running while crossing the road to avoid the accident. The proportion of running
of the pedestrian is 60 of out of 70 pedestrians. A 20-30 and 30-40 age groups pedestrian is
304 out of 473 respondents used a brisk walk. A 61 respondent is use running walk and 102
respondents used the walking style for the undesignated midblock cross.
< 20 Age 20-30 & 30-40 Age

70 350
60 304
60 300
No' of pedestrians
No' of pedestrians
50 250
40 200
30 150 114
102
20 100
10
10 50
0 0 5
0 0
Walk Brisk walk Run Run + walk Walk Brisk walk Run Run +
Walking style walk
Walking style
140
40-50 Age > 50 Age
125 160
138
120 140
100 120
No' of pedestrians
No' of pedestrians
100
80
80
60
60
40
40
20 10 20
0 0 0 0
0 0
Brisk walk Run Run + walk Walk Brisk walk Run Run +
Walking style Walking style walk
Figure 30 Pedestrian Walking Style
Statically analysis is represented 20-30 and 30-40 age groups pedestrian was not any significant
effect using a mobile phone or carrying baggage’s. 93% of 40 to50 age groups pedestrians used
only brisk walk style for undesignated midblock section crossing.
54
100% of above 50 age groups respondent used only walk style for undesignated midblock
section crossing.
Initiation of crossing: A total of 868 respondent in which 605 pedestrians started the crossing
to curb. When 263 respondents start the crossing median.
Initiation crossing
700 605
No' of pedestrians
600
500
400
263
300
200
100
0
Kerb Median
Initiation crossing
Figure 31Pedestrian Initiation Crossing
When there are many differences in walking style from curb to median and median to curb.
The number of a pedestrian brisk walk from the curb was higher than those other walking styles
from the median.
Crossing time:
Crossing Time
450 395
400 362
No' of pedestrians
350
300 375
250 191 203
200
150 107
78
100
50 21
0 4
0
< 2.5 2.5 to 5 5 to 8 8 to 12 > 12
Crossing time in second
Perceived Actual
Figure 32 Pedestrian Crossing Time
55
Crossing time its time need a pedestrian to cross the road section without any collision. In
crossing time, not including waiting time. Crossing time indicated the pedestrian takes time to
avoiding accident or collision. Statically analysis represented 868 respondents in which a
maximum number of respondents used brisk walk style for crossing. The maximum, minimum
and average crossing time was 23 seconds, 4 second and 5 seconds. Pedestrian is cross the
undesignated section in groups feel safe then alone.
5.5 Pedestrian Behaviour Characteristics

Pedestrian speed change:
Change in walking style is indicated pedestrian tries to adjust herself/himself according to
traffic condition for safe crossing.
Pedestrian Speed change

600 558 552
500
No' of pedestrians
400
310 316
300
200
100
0
Perceived Actual
Pedestrian Speed Change Yes Pedestrian Speed Change No
Figure 33 Pedestrian Speed Change
It was observed that a big percentage of the pedestrian (64%) had to change them speed while
crossing the road. When 36% of pedestrians cross the undesignated section without a change
in speed.
Waiting time:
Waiting time is represented the time spent at the curb or median waiting for adequate clearance
or gap to cross the undesignated road section.
It was observed that approximately 90% pedestrian waited for a suitable gap to cross. When
pedestrian crosses the midblock alone feel the unsafe but cross the road section in groups
56
pedestrian feel safe. In this study pedestrian used a mobile phone, carrying baggage, not any
impact on waiting time.
Waiting Time
565
600
500
No' of pedestrians
400
300 238
198
164
200
100 30 168 51
0 17
<0.5 0.05 to 5 5 to 12 12 to 25
Waiting time in second
Perceived Actual
Figure 34 Pedestrian Waiting time
Crossing Patterns:
Crossing Patterns
600 552
480
500
400
Axis Title
275
300
177
200 116
100 15
98
0 23
Perpendicular Oblique Zig-Zag Rolling
Axis Title
Perceived Actual
Figure 35 Crossing Patterns

Generally, all pedestrian crosses the road section perpendicular or rolling patterns. Pedestrians
were observed walking along the curb or median before crossing. Normally, pedestrians
crossing patterns were categories into four type, such as perpendicular, oblique, zig-zag and
rolling pattern. Statically analysis is represented 64% part of pedestrians used a perpendicular
pattern. Its represented pedestrian used the shortest path for undesignated crossing. While 31%,
57
2.64%, and 13.34% used oblique, zig-zag and L-shaped patterns. These results indicated that
pedestrian used the shortest path after walking along the curb and median.
No of Unsuccessful Attempts:
The unsuccessful attempts of pedestrian road crossing are perceived and actual is show in the
below graph. An unsuccessful attempt occurs when a pedestrian tries to cross the road and then
comes back due to a safety concern. The number of unsuccessful attempts can be used as in
indicated of the risk of a crash while crossing illegally. Statically analysis represented 53%
pedestrian cross the undesignated midblock section on their first attempts and 42% of the
pedestrian cross after first attempts. The maximum number of unsuccessful attempts was 3 and
happened during a heavy traffic condition.
Unsuccessfull attempts
400 339
350
No' of pedestrians
289
300
250 208
170 178 187
200 167
142
150
100
50 20 27
6 3
0
Male Female Male Female
Perceived Actual
Gender
1 2 3
Figure 36 No of Unsuccessful Attempts
Lane interacting:
Figure 37 Pedestrian lane Interacting
58
A 445 respondent start the crossing curb point. When a 184-respondent pedestrian starts the
crossing middle or median of the road section, and a 239 respondent start the crossing shoulder
portion.
5.6 Traffic Characteristics
Stage of crossing (Numbers)
A 456 pedestrians respondent cross the undesignated section in first attempts, when a
365respondent cross the undesignated section in second attempts. An only 47 pedestrians need
three attempts to cross the undesignated midblock section.
Stage of Crossing
500 456
450
400 365
No of Pedestrian's
350
300
250
200
150
100
47
50
0
First Attempts Second Attempts Thirds Attempts
No of Stage
Figure 38 Pedestrian Crossing Stages

Lateral Distance from vehicle (Distance In meter):
Lateral distance
350 312
324
300
No' of pedestrians
323
250 212
194
200
139
150 186
100
46
50
0
0
< 0.25 0.25 - 1.50 1.50 - 3.50 3.50 - 5 >5
Lateral distance in meter
Perceived Actual
Figure 39 Lateral Distance between Pedestrian and Vehicles
59
In this study lateral distance is express the safe horizontal distance between pedestrian and
vehicles. One of the most important factors of a safe crossing.
The statically analysis expresses the maximum and minimum distance is 6meter and 1meter.
38% pedestrian is cross the section when vehicles are 1meter distance. 36% pedestrian is cross
the section when vehicles are 2-3meter distance.
In this study 40-50 and more than 50 age pedestrians’ groups cross the undesignated section
when vehicles lateral distance more than 3meter.
Longitudinal Distance from Vehicles (Distance in meter):
Longitudinal distance
700 642
600
No' of pedestrians
500
400
300 228 238
183
200 143
89
76 68
100 43 26
0
<3 3 to 12 12 to 19.05 19.05 to 25 > 25
Longitudinal distance in meter
Perceived Actual
Figure 40 Longitudinal Distance Between Pedestrain and Vehicels
In this study, longitudinal distance is express the safe vertical distance between pedestrian and
vehicles. A 30-meter road stretch is taken and determined the pedestrian and vehicle distance.
Statically analysis is represented when the distance of vehicles is more than 3-meter pedestrian
start cross the section. The safe crossing of undesignated section longitudinal distance is
important.
Use of force gap:
When road section is clear and no movement of vehicles, so pedestrian easily cross the road
without any force to vehicles, but excessively vehicles movement in section. Pedestrian need
to show hand to vehicular to reduce the vehicles speed or stopped vehicles.
60
Force Gape
800
676
700
No' of Pedestrians
600
500
400
300
192
200
100
0
Force gap Yes No
Figure 41 Pedestrian Used Force Gap
Statically analysis is represented 676 pedestrians are used the force gapes for safe crossing.
When 192 respondents not used force gapes times of crossing. The analysis is represented 192
respondents feel safe and 676 respondents taken the risk for crossing.
Preference of vehicle while crossing and Interacting with vehicles:
Preference of Vehicles and Interacting of

300 Vehicles
243
250 223
186
No' of pedestrian
200 177
153
150 120
113
101
90 81
100 68
48
50
71 62
0
2W 3W SC BC LCV HCV BUS
Types of vehicles
PREFERENCE OF VHC INTERACTING VHC DURING CROSS
Figure 42 Preference of Vehicles and Interacting of Vehicles
61
Traffic volume is continuing, pedestrian wait to clear the road lane or given the preference of
vehicles to pass. Statically analysis is show 466 pedestrians given small and big car first
preference. 153 respondents given LCV to first preference. 101 pedestrians given bus first
preference. 53% pedestrian given the small and big car first preference.
Driver Yielding by Lane Change Behaviour:
The proportion of driver in this study was medium. The yielding behavior was investigated in
two forms:
vehicular speed reduction and vehicular lane change. They were observed to be 65% and
54.50% of all drivers. Therefore, the two observed variables were combined and termed as
yielding in the analysis. As their rates were moderate, further analysis of the yielding behaviour
was not performed.
Lane Change Speed Change
473 561
480 600
460 500 407
No of Pedestrians
No of Pedestrians
440 400
420
395 300
400
200
380
100
360
340 0
Yes No Yes No
Lane Change Speed Change
Figure 43 Driver Yielding by Lane Change Behaviours

Gap accepted:
Gap Acceptance
600
500
No' of Pedestrians
400
300
556
200
312
100
0
Lag Gap
Gap accepted
Figure 44 Gap Acceptance by Pedestrian
62
Pedestrian arriving at curb or median, most of the pedestrian may look at traffic to check the
satiable gap for safe crossing the road. The waiting time and number of attempts they checking
available gaps in traffic affected pedestrian gap acceptance behaviour. Gap acceptance
pedestrian behaviour is analyzed by video graphic data. 312 pedestrians are accepted lag gap
for the first vehicular gap. 556 pedestrians are waiting for sufficient clearance gap for safe road
crossing.
Vehicle speed:
Vehicles speed directly affected pedestrian during the crossing. Vehicles speed is categories in
five groups. 249 pedestrians cross the section when the speed of vehicles 20-30kmph. 277
respondents cross the road when the speed of vehicles 30-40 kmph. 331 pedestrians cross the
road when the speed of vehicles is 40-50. Greater than 50kmph speed Only 9 pedestrians are
cross undesignated road section. Statically analysis is represented, when increase the vehicles
speed increases the waiting time, changed in crossing patterns.
Vehicles Speed
>60, 9, 1% < 20, 0, 0%
20-30, 249,
29%
40-50, 331,
38%
30-40, 277,
32%
< 20 20-30 30-40 40-50 ta
Figure 45 Speed of Vehicles
Traffic volume:
Traffic volume directly affected the road crossing. Traffic volume increased, increased
pedestrian crossing time, changing in walking style, increasing the no of crossing attempts,
walking speed changed. Vehicle volume composite in five groups less than 6, 6-12, 12-18, 18-
24, 24-30 and more than 30. Vehicles volume is 24 to 30, 599 number of pedestrians cross the
road section. Vehicle volume is 18-24, 244 numbers of pedestrian cross the road section.
63
Vehicles Volume
700
599
600
Vehicles Volumes 500
400
300 244
200
100 33
0 22 12
0
No's of Vehicles
<6 6-12 12-18 18-24 24-30 > 30
Figure 46 Vehicles Volumes
5.7 Pedestrian safety analysis

Based on gender:
When measured pedestrian safety at the undesignated midblock section in different two
conditions. When the first condition is pedestrian cross the undesignated section alone and the
second condition is when a pedestrian crosses the section in groups.
Gender
200
178
180 171
160
140
No' of pedestrians
122
120
102
100
84
80
60
60
44 45
37
40
20
20
0
Extremely unsafe Unsafe Moderate safe Safe Extremely safe
Different Safety Condition

Male Female
Figure 47 User’s Perception for Safety Based on Gender
64
Gender
250 233
200
161
No' of pedestrians
148
150 129 128
127
110 114
96
100 85 83 80
71
50
39 38 42
50
17 11
0 7 0
0
Male Female
Gender
Alone Extremely unsafe Alone Unsafe Alone Moderate safe Alone Safe
Alone Extremely safe Group Gender Group Extremely unsafe Group Unsafe
Group Moderate safe Group Safe Group Extremely safe
Figure 48 Comparision Male and Female Under The Groups and Alone Condition
From the analysis of whether male or female present significant differences in undesignated
midblock crossing perception. Statically analysis is representing female (208) feels unsafe
compare the male (142).
Male and female having a different perception. Female is more scare then male during the
crossing and also female taken less risk than male. Statically analysed pedestrian safety alone
and groups conditions. A female pedestrian is alone and cross undesignated midblock feel
unsafe (78%) that the male (45%). Male and female cross the undesignated midblock section
feel safe then alone situations.
Based on Age:
Age is another major factor influencing perception. Different age groups having different
walking style, crossing patterns, waiting time, crossing time. Statically analysis of less than 20-
year (58%), 20-30 (66%), and 30-40 (73%) age groups feel safe to cross the undesignated
midblock section. Statically analysis of different age groups shows in above figures. The less
than 20, 20-30 and 30-40 age groups not having any issues during the crossing. 40-50 age
groups were 144 pedestrians in which 78% pedestrian is felt unsafe when crossing the
undesignated midblock section. Greater than 50 age group were 69% pedestrian feel unsafe.
65
The statically analysis indicated that the response of above 40-year age pedestrians to those
question was statically different from the other three study age groups.
< 20 Age 140

20-30 Age
127
50 43
45 120
95
No' of pedestrians
40
No' of pedestrians
100
35
30 80
25
53
20 60
40
15 9 9 35
10 6 40
3
5
20
0
0
Condition Condition
30-40 Age 40-50 Age

80 70 60
68
60 52
No' of pedestrians
70
50
No' of oedestrains
60
50 40
30
40
26 28 20 12 13
30 7
14 10
20 13
0
10
0
Condition
Condition
>50 Age
70 64
60
No' of pedestrians
50 40
40
30
18 16
20 13
10
0
Extremely Safe Safe Moderate Safe Unsafe Extremely Unsafe
Condition
Figure 49 Safety Analysis Based on Age Groups
66
Based on Education:
Pedestrian safety analyzed based on education. Education categories in five different groups
less than SSC, SSC, HSC, Graduated, Above Graduated. Less than SSC educated respondent
is 90 in which 51 respondents feel extremely unsafe, 21 respondents feel unsafe, 9 respondents
feel safe to cross the undesignated midblock section. SSC educated pedestrian is 393
respondents in which 156 respondents feel extremely unsafe and 84 pedestrians feel unsafe.
192 HSC educated respondent when 160 respondents feel safe the undesignated cross.
< SSC SSC

60 51 180 156
50 160
No' of pedestrians
140
40 120
No' of pedestrian
84 82
30 100
21 80 62
20 60
9 40
6 9
10 3 20
0 0
Condition
Condition
HSC
80
59
No' of pedestrians
55
60 46
40
20
12
20
0
Condition
GRADUATION ABOVE GRAD

50 26 25
39 30
25
No' of pedestrians
No' of pedestrians
40 18
25 21 24 20
30
15
20 7 10 5 3
10 5
0 0
Condition
Condition
Figure 50 Pedestrian Safety Analysis Based on Education
67
Rate the risk taken during crossing the cross walk:
Rate of risk taken during crossing

350
300
300
242
No' of Pedestrians
250
200
150 134
111
100 81
50
0
Extremely Unsafe Moderate Safe Extremely
unsafe safe safe
Safety Condition
Figure 51 Pedestrian Risk Analysis

868 respondents asked how much risk you took during the crosswalk at undesignated road
section. 376 respondents rated, they feel not safely to cross the crosswalk at undesignated road
section. 300 respondents feel moderate safe cross the walk at undesignated road section. 192
pedestrian respondents feel safe to cross the crosswalk at undesignated road section.
Overall rating of your experience during road crossing:
Overall rating
600
481
500
No' of Pedestrians
400
300
200 164
129
100 60
34
0
Excellent very good Good Poor Very poor
Experienced Rating
Figure 52 Pedestrian Experienced Rating
68
Overall experienced undesignated midblock section crossing is taken to respondent

pedestrians. 481 respondents’ pedestrians having well experienced. Because they cross the
section every day. 481 respondent pedestrians in which 30 to 40 age groups pedestrian is
involved. 164 respondent’s pedestrians experience poor in which above 50 age respondent
pedestrians involved.
A facility like underpass or FOB near your location:
Under Pass or FOB Near Your Location

290 588
280
No' of Pedestrians
270
260
250
280
240
230
220
210
Yes No
Facility Near by Location
Figure 53 FOB or Under Pass Facility
This study is performing in two cities in three different urban locations. In Surat city, At Udhna
location having the foot over bridge facility for pedestrian crossing. Other two location not
having any pedestrian crossing facility.
Lack of signal, marking & infrastructure:
Unsafe Factor
700
583
600
No's of Pedestrians
500
400
285
300
200
100
0
Lack of signal, marking & infrastructure Less of priority given by driver for
pedestrian
Unsafe Factor
s Figure 54 Pedestrian Unsafe Factors
69
Which factor is most unsafe in an urban area for crosswalk? A 583 (67%) pedestrians saying
lack of signal, marking & infrastructure is a most unsafe factor in an urban area for crosswalk.
285 pedestrians saying less priority given by driver for the pedestrian.
Aware Laws:
Aware laws
800
700
600
No' of Pedestrias
500
400
300
200
100
0
Yes No
Aware Laws
Figure 55 Pedestrian Aware Law
Statically analysis is representing a 683 pedestrian is aware of the laws and regulation. A 185
respondent not aware of any rules, regulation.
How do you feel when you cross the road at cross-walk?
Feeling
600 560
500
No' of Pedestrians
400
300
200
105 108
100 51 44
0
Very Alert Alert Anger Fear Realx
Pedestrian Feeling
Figure 56 Pedestrian Feeling During Crossing
70
Pedestrian cross the midblock during the various situation. Every time during the crossing
pedestrian is not felt relax mood. Undesignated midblock crossing 868 respondents in which
560 respondents feel alertness. 105 respondents feel angriness, only 44 respondents feel relax.
Which facility you preferer for road crossing:
Statically analysis shows 148 respondent preferer underpass facility for crossing. A 396 (46%)
respondents preferer foot over bridge, 89 respondents preferer zebra crossing, 95 respondents
preferer traffic signal, 66 respondents preferer policeman standing, 53 respondents preferer
cross anywhere, and 21 respondents preferer table top facility for road crossing.
Facility preferer for road crossing

450
396
400
350
No' of Pedestrians
300
250
200 148
150
89 95
100 66 53
50 21
0
Under pass FOB Zebra Traffic Policeman Cross Table top
crossing signal standing anywhere
Facility for Road Crossing
Figure 57 Pedestrian Road Crossing Facility
Preferer distance to that facility:

A 602 Pedestrian preferer the physical structural crossing facility nearby the 50 to the 100meter
distance for easy and safe crossing of undesignated midblock section.
Preferer distance to that facility

700
602
600
No of pedestrians
500
400
300
173
200
93
100
0
< 50 50-100 > 100
Distance in metres
Figure 58 Preferable Distance for Facility
71
How safe you feel when you cross the different traffic condition:
800
734
700
600
508 499
500
No' of Pedestrians
400 361
334
302 294
300 285
270
244 233
220 216
200 169
114
90
100 69 71 68 66
18 16 17
0 0 2 3 2 1 2
0
Fig.1 Fig.2 Fig.3 Fig.4 Fig.5 Fig.6
Different Traffic Condition Figures
Figure 59 Pedestrian Perception in Different Traffic Condition
Figure 1&2 traffic is very low so pedestrian is easily cross the road. 90% respondent is feeling
safe for road crossing. Figure 3&4 having moderate traffic. In fig.3, 244 respondents feel
unsafe, 302 respondents feel moderate safe and 233 respondents feel safe situation for road
crossing. Fig 5&6 having congestive traffic situation 90% of respondent having feel unsafe
condition.
72
CHAPTER 06 STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELLING
73
CHAPTER 06: STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELLING
CHAPTER 06
STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELLING
6.1 Background
Applied to data on attitudes, perceptions, stated behavioural intentions, and actual behaviour,
SEM can be used to specify and test alternative causal hypotheses. It has been found that, as
might be expected, causality is often mutual. The assumption that behaviours are influenced
by attitudes, perceptions, and behavioural intentions without feedbacks does not hold up when
tested using SEM. These results challenge the assumption, held by some, that stated preference
(SP) choices or ratings can be directly scaled into revealed-preference (RP) choice models.
SEM results show that, in most applications, SP data are a direct function of RP choice.
SEM is a family of statistical analysis. Estimates multiple and interrelated dependence
relationships. It represents unobserved concepts in the relationships and accounts for
measurement error in the estimation process. Structural model “describes the causal
connections among the latent variables”.
Bollen (1989) defined the basic model of SEM as follows:
Structural equation modeling (SEM), as a concept, is a combination of statistical techniques

such as exploratory factor analysis and multiple regression. The purpose of SEM is to examine
a set of relationships between one or more Independent Variables (IV) and one or more
Dependent Variables (DV).
Latent variables not directly measured, the symbol of the latent variable is oval.
Observed variables directly measured, a symbol of observed variables is rectangular.
Nature of causal dependency is unidirectional, like a ’one-way road’ (arrow with one head).
74
If there is no a priori information available about the direction of causal dependency, it is

assumed to be correlational (arrow with two heads).
Two main components of SEM are presented such as CFA operates with observed and latent
variables, path analysis operates only with observed variables.
Types of SEM models:
• Path analysis
• Confirmatory factor analysis
• Structural regression model
• Latent change model
The simple process of structural equations modeling developing such as,
• Model Identification
• Model Estimation
• Model fit.
The latest software release attempting to implement SEM is graphical and intuitive AMOS
(Arbuckle, 1997). AMOS has since 2000 taken LISREL’s place as a module of a well-known
statistical software package SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences).
SEM Software’s:
• LISREL
• AMOS
• EQS
• MPLUS
• SAS
Analysis of Moment Structures (AMOS)
This course is a brief introduction and overview of structural equation modeling using the
AMOS (Analysis of Moment Structures) software. Structural equation modeling (SEM)
encompasses such diverse statistical techniques as path analysis, confirmatory factor analysis,
causal modeling with latent variables, and even analysis of variance and multiple linear
regression. The course features an introduction to the logic of SEM, the assumptions and
75
required input for SEM analysis, and how to perform SEM analyses using AMOS. By the end
of the course, you should be able to fit structural equation models using AMOS.
6.2 Expletory Factor Analysis

Developing the model, furthermore, missing data, outliner, multivariate normality, sample size,
estimation techniques, model complexity, and commonality are important criteria. Collected
dataset samples missing 23 cases were input by using the expectation maximization algorithm,
and 36 outliers were detected by using Mahala Nobis D2 formula.
Figure 60 SPSS Mahala Nobis D2 Sheet

EFA was the first step of the analysis is to determined correlated groups of variables related to
pedestrian safety, behaviour, and perception. The main purpose of principal component
analysis (PCA) was determined the main element related to the pedestrian. In this study used
PCA techniques for two main objectives: the first is to understand the structure of the large set
of variables, and the second is to reduce the data set to a more adequate size while at the same
time retaining as much of the original data as possible. PCA may allow the identification of a
limited number of components describing the examined issues, on the bias of a large number
of questions
All variable from the question presented in the table were included in this SEM analysis. It is
noted many questions in questionnaire form eliminated because of a minor proposition of
pedestrian reported using. Questionnaire form having a total of 19 variables were selected for
the analysis.
76
Figure 61 Component Matrix Tables

Those 19 variables were tested on how much they share and they were clustered together into
components. In order for authentic performance PCA result, it is important to sample size is
adequate. The basic theory of formulating any model to at least fifty to hundred respondent per
variable should be available which was obviously met in the present dataset. Exploratory factor
analysis was performed the perception score obtained for fourteen attributes using principal
component analysis in SPSS software. The principal component analysis method is the
following factors were deleted, first is when factor reflected less than 0.5 value, a factor with
low commonalities and factor which are cross loaded. The table no 6 is shows component
matrix.
Component Matrix
Component
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
No’s on unsuccessful
.719
attempts
Force gap .649
Walking style .497
Education -.477 .410
Vehicle speed .680
Vehicles volumes .569
Lateral distance .509
77
Frequency of crossing -.599 .432

waiting time .521
Crossing patterns .503
Crossing time .612
Vehicles types -.633
Age .589
Purpose .632
Gender .549
Longitudinal distance .593 -.546
Undesignated Crossing .631 .497
Dressing
Carrying baggage -.606 .478
Extraction Method: Principal Component Analysis.
a. 5 components extracted.
Table 6 Component Matrix
The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was also used in which value above
0.7 are considered to very satisfactory. Table 7 shows the KMO and Cronbach alpha value.
KMO and Bartlett's Test Reliability Statistics
Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin Measure of Sampling Adequacy. .782
Cronbach's Alpha N of Items
Bartlett's Test of Sphericity Approx. Chi-Square 2290.898
.743 19
Table 7 Data Sample KMO Value and Cronbach’s Alpha Value
KMO value of this study sample is 0.782 indicated the sampling is adequate. The Bartlett test
got a significant value of 2990.898.
Figure 62 Kmo Value
78
Cronbach’s alpha reliability test was performed to analyze the appropriateness of the categories
of formulating the pedestrian safety performance at the undesignated section and the reliability
of the data sample. The Cronbach’s alpha value ranges from 0 to 1 values of alpha ranging
from 0.6 to 0.7 are considered as sufficient, however, a value of more than 0.7 is considered as
good in reliability testing. In this study, sample reliability of the questionnaire is data is
obtained 0.743 value. Cronbach’s alpha value is represented by questionnaire sample data
reliable.
Figure 63 Cronebach Alpha

Normality test
The skewness and kurtosis were measured for each item to conducted normality assessment.
The absolute value of skewness and kurtosis between -1.5 to +1.5. The skewness and kurtosis
value -1.292 to 1.346 shows that data is normally distributed. Thus, it confirmed the eligibility
of applying SEM approach for the corresponding data set.
Assessment of Normality (Group number 1)
Variable min max skew kurtosis
PS1 1.000 5.000 .287 -.673
PBC3 1.000 4.000 .203 -1.050
SE3 1.000 4.000 1.163 .433
PS2 1.000 5.000 -.647 .226
79
Variable min max skew kurtosis
PBC2 .000 1.000 .742 -1.049
TC3 1.000 5.000 .543 -.674
PCC3 1.000 5.000 1.008 .585
PCC2 1.000 5.000 .468 1.346
PCC1 1.000 4.000 -.101 -1.023
TC2 1.000 5.000 -1.135 .940
TC1 1.000 5.000 -.129 -1.292
SE2 .000 1.000 .246 -1.139
SE1 1.000 5.000 .445 -.999
PBC1 .000 1.000 .632 -.248
Table 8 Assessment of Normality
6.3 Structural Equation Model Formulating Steps

Amos graphic software start in a computer like Start → Programs → Statistical Software →
Amos 6 → Amos Graphics, the following screen will display:
Figure 64 AMOS Software Starting Display
80
The left side of screen have the different tools that can be used to create path diagrams. The
right side of screen have the toolbar buttons is a column that will display information about the
model after estimates have been calculated. The remainder of the screen contains the area
where the path diagram will be drawn.
Figure 65 AMOS Data Upload
To load the information, attend File information Files. the information Files panel then
opens. Click on File Name and navigate to the situation wherever the information file is hold
on. By default, Amos appearance for Associate in SPSS file. Option for the information file
you want to open, click Open, then OK.
Figure 66 Formulating Network
81
The next step is to draw the SEM model diagram. A model wherever a 5 latent variable and
every latent variable having 3 to four discovered variables are drawn first to feature the
discovered variables to the diagram, 1st click on the blue parallelogram within the higher left
corner of the toolbar (alternatively click on Diagram Draw Observed).
Figure 67 Variable Entry
Then within the empty drawing space hold down the left push to draw a parallelogram. Left-
click 5 additional times to make a complete of six equally sized boxes. to feature the latent
variables, click on the blue oval within the toolbox (alternatively click on Diagram Draw
Unobserved The next step is to connected variables to observer variables. The simplest to name
the discovered variables is to point out an inventory of variable names within the loaded file.
attend read Variables in Dataset. The Variables in Dataset window then opens. To name
the common latent variable right click within it and opt for Object Properties. Then click on
the Text tab and enter the Variable name box. After the variable naming, to a connected variable
to observed variable.
82
Figure 68 Developed SEM Network
Before estimating the model, it's attainable to decide on the knowledge that may be provided
within the output by visiting read Analysis Properties. Click on the Output tab and opt for the
subsequent options: reduction history, Standardized estimates, square multiple correlations,
and Modification indices.
Figure 69 Select Analysis Properties
83
Figure 70 Developed SEM Model
In AMOS software, set the property of different calculation, click the model run out button.
6.4 SEM Model Establishment

The relation of latent variable and observed variable establishment final SEM model, below
figure show the structure of the SEM.
The model should be simple and more indicators need more sample. Therefore, to develop and
test the structure. CFA method was conducted for five latent constructed and their fourteen
indicators only, all dataset of the model have Cronbach’s alpha value greater than 0.7. the
indicates that the internal consistency and reliability of the model are good. The loading factor
value is higher than 0.5. This indicates that the SEM model is capable of reflecting the average
of variations among the measured variable and item reliability in order. Below the table is show
the estimation of CFA parameters.
84
Figure 71 SEM Model
85
6.5 Estimation of Parameters for CFA Method

Latent Indicators Cronbach’s Measurable Factor Unique
variable alpha value loading variance
SE1 0.48 0.39
SE SE2 0.39 0.51 0.22
SE3 0.48 0.39
PBC1 0.45 0.18
PBC PBC2 0.50 0.53 0.45
PBC3 0.58 0.39
PCC1 0.63 0.44
PCC PCC2 0.59 0.54 0.27
PCC3 0.743 0.49 0.55
TC1 0.49 0.55
TC TC2 0.71 0.71 0.68
TC3 0.56 0.71
PS PS1 0.58 0.39
PS2 -- 0.55 0.49
Table 9 Estimation Parameter of CFA Method
The free parameter is estimated from the observed data and is expected to be nonzero.
Conversely, the fixed parameter is not estimated from the data and normally are set to zero.
Besides, the structural model is evaluated by using serval measure of goodness-of-fit indices
such as the ratio of chi-square to the degree of freedom, normed fit index (NFI), relative fit
index (RFI), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), and so on.
Latent Path Estimated S.E. C.R. P
Exogenous Observed
variable variable
Social SE1SE3 Age 0.479 0.034 18.68 0.000
economics SE2 SE1 Gender 0.512 0.029 17.65 0.000
characteristics SE3SE2 Purpose 0.481 0.039 12.33 0.000
Pedestrian PBC1TC1 Walking style 0.578 0.075 7.71 0.000
behavioral PBC2TC1 Force gap 0.533 0.058 0.00
characteristics
9.19
86
PBC3TS1 No of 0.453 0.049 0.000

unsuccessful
attempts 9.24
Pedestrian PCC1TC2 Waiting time 0.486 0.039 12.46 0.000
crossing PCC2PCC3 Crossing time 0.539 0.043 12.54 0.000
characteristics PCC3PBC1 Crossing pattern 0.629 0.047 13.39 0.000
Traffic TC1TC2 Vehicles speed 0.493 0.059 8.35 0.0187
characteristics TC2TC1 Vehicles volume 0.708 0.097 7.29 0.000
TC3PC1 Lateral distance 0.561 0.077 7.27 0.000
Pedestrian PS1TC3 Longitudinal 0.582 0.057 0.000
safety distance 10.21
PS2PCC2 Undesignated 0.554 0.047 0.000
crossing 11.78
Table 10 Latent Exogenous Variable Table
6.6 SEM Model Result

SEM models output includes several fit indices that focus on the overall fit of the model. In the
below table, the overall model chi-square is 247.18 with 67 degrees of freedom (DOF), and the
p-value is 0.0187. the ratio of chi-square to DOF (3.69) is within the permissible range. The
goodness of fit index value is 0.988 and this is a good indicator. “A value of the RMSEA of
about 0.05 or less would indicate a close fit of the model in relation to the degrees of freedom,
“The RMSEA value is 0.054 is the permissible range (< 0.05). Chi-square indicates an
acceptable fit for the CFA model.
Model C-MIN DF P CMIN/DF
Default model 247.183 67 0.0187 3.69
Independence model 368.146 91 .000 4.045
Table 11 Model Properties
87
Figure 72 Model Parameter Properties
The traffic characteristics have the largest effect on the pedestrian safety at undesignated
midblock section, represented by the measured variable like the traffic volume, vehicles speed,
and lateral distance. Traffic volume has the highest factor loading indicating a high level of
pedestrian perception satisfaction with increased the traffic volume pedestrian feels unsafe for
undesignated road crossing.
Observed variable lateral distance has also positively influenced pedestrian safety at
undesignated section but with low loading indicating the pedestrian safety are not adequately
up to the mark of pedestrian perception satisfaction.
Pedestrian crossing characteristics are a second latent variable that influenced the pedestrian
safety after traffic characteristics. Observed variable crossing patterns positively influenced
pedestrian safety at undesignated but low loading indicating the pedestrian safety are not
adequately up to the mark of pedestrian perception satisfaction.
Structural equation model is representing, traffic volume is increasing at undesignated

midblock road section pedestrian change crossing patterns.
Traffic characteristics and pedestrian crossing characteristics are some of the important factors
that influence pedestrian safety at undesignated midblock road section crossing.
88
Estimation of Model Parameter
The goodness of fit Parameter Permissible range CFA Value

and indices
Chi-square As low as possible 247.182
The goodness of fit DOF As high as possible 67
and indices Normed Chi-square Between 2 to 5 3.689
P Value <0.05 or 0.01 0.018
Absolute fit indices GFI 0 to1 0.988
RMSEA <0.05 0.054
NFI >0.90 or 0.95 0.755
Incremental fit TLI >0.90 or 0.95 0.938
indices CFI >0.90 or 0.95 0.954
IFI >0.90 or 0.95 0.954
Table 12 Estimation of Model Parameter
89
CHAPTER 07: CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION
90
CHAPTER 07: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Chapter 07
Conclusion and Recommendation
7.1 Conclusion
The study carried out with the objective of analyzed pedestrian safety at undesignated midblock
section using the user’s perception and structural equation model. Data for the present study
has been collected from two fast developing cities of Gujarat state namely, Surat and
Ahmedabad. Questionnaire and videography survey have been conducted to achieve accuracy
in data collection. To validate the safety analysis by questionnaire and video graphic method.
The finding of the study is summarized below:
• The traffic characteristics have the largest effect on the pedestrian safety at
undesignated midblock section, represented by the measured variable like the traffic
volume, vehicles speed, and lateral distance. Traffic volume has the highest factor
loading indicating a high level of pedestrian perception satisfaction with increased the
traffic volume pedestrian feels unsafe for undesignated road crossing.
• Observed variable lateral distance has also positively influenced pedestrian safety at
undesignated section but with low loading indicating the pedestrian safety are not
adequately up to the mark of pedestrian perception satisfaction.
• Pedestrian crossing characteristics are a second latent variable that influenced the
pedestrian safety after traffic characteristics. Observed variable crossing patterns
positively influenced pedestrian safety at undesignated but low loading indicating the
pedestrian safety are not adequately up to the mark of pedestrian perception satisfaction.
• Structural equation model is representing, traffic volume is increasing at undesignated
midblock road section pedestrian change crossing patterns.
• Traffic characteristics and pedestrian crossing characteristics are some of the important
factors that influence pedestrian safety at undesignated midblock road section crossing.
• The yielding behaviour was investigated in two forms: vehicles speed reduction and
vehicles lane change. statically analysis result is represented 64% of drivers reduced
their speed and 54.5% changed lanes in case of a pedestrian crossing the road. More
than half of the percentage may suggest an alert driving behaviour in this study area. In
this study, approximately one-third of pedestrian (33.75%) used rolling and oblique
crossing patterns to cross the road, which is termed as riskier compared to the normal
crossing.
91
CHAPTER 07: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Approximately 65% of the pedestrian waited for a suitable gap before starting the crossing
maneuver. Pedestrian crossing in the group did not wait longer compared to those crossing
alone. Furthermore, a pedestrian crossing in a group feels safe compared to those crossing
alone. Pedestrian waiting time decreased with the increased group size. The waiting time was
also diminished when another pedestrian was present on the road in both directions. There was
no significant relationship between whether a pedestrian waits or not and the types of clothing,
mobile phone use, accompanied the child and carrying baggage. However, these aspects
should be investigated further, as the sample sizes for so0me of the subgroups were small.
Approximately 53% of the pedestrian crossed in their first attempts. The pedestrian who made
more attempts had consequently higher waiting times. Less than 7% of the pedestrian was
observed running while crossing the road to avoid a conflict with oncoming vehicles. The
number of pedestrian running is possible as a result of the high traffic volume and low speed
along the studied part. During the crossing, approximately 64% pedestrian changed their
walking speed in response to their surroundings. The difference in walking style was not
significant when carrying bags or when using a mobile phone.
More than 60% of the pedestrian used the perpendicular path for crossing. The choice of the
pedestrian was dependent upon the crossing point, waiting time or not, and the presence of
another pedestrian crossing in the same direction. the crossing time was significantly different
for different group sizes, with the average crossing increasing in the number of pedestrians in
the group. Carrying baggage, accompanied child and mobile phone used had no effect on the
crossing time.
7.2 The Scope of the Further Research

The present study only limited to analyzed most influencing factor during the undesignated
midblock section crossing. Confirmatory factor analysis is the basis of the measurement model
in full structural equation modeling (SEM) and can be estimated using SEM software. A further
effect of other observe variable on the undesignated crossing also be carried by generating the
model. The model is developed for five different pedestrian and traffic characteristics latent
variable. Amos cannot accurately estimate models when the observed variables are categorical.
The methodology presented in this study can be further used to developed a pedestrian crossing
facility like a foot over bridge, underpass etc.
The study also can be extended to compared all three software models and determined the most
influencing factor during the undesignated midblock crossing at the urban arterial road.
92
References
1. Abhaya Jha and Geetam Tiwari. (2017). “Analysis of Pedestrian Movement on
Delhi Roads by Using Naturalistic Observation Techniques”. Transportation
Research Board No. 2634, 2017, pp. 95–100.
2. B Raghuram Kadali and P Vedagiri (2013). “Modelling pedestrian road crossing
behaviour under mixed traffic condition”. European Transport \ Trasporti Europei.
Volume 4, No 3, 2014.
3. B. Raghuram KADALI and Nivedan RATHI. (2015). “Evaluation of Pedestrian
Mid-block Road Crossing Behavior Using Artificial Neural Network (ANN)”.
CICTP 2014: Safe, Smart, and Sustainable Multimodal Transportation Systems
ASCE,1911-1922
4. B. Raghuram Kadali and Dr. P. Vedagiri (2012). “Pedestrians’ Behavioural
Analysis During Road Crossing”. Proceedings of International Conference on
Advances in Architecture and Civil Engineering, (AARCV 2012), 21st – 23rd June
2012 506 Paper ID TRA106, Vol. 1.
5. Carol Holland, Roslyn Hill. (2017). “The effect of age, gender and driver status on
pedestrians’ intentions to cross the road in risky situations”. Accident Analysis and
Prevention. 39 (2007) 224–237.
6. Catriona Havarda and Alexandra Willis. (2012). “Effects of installing a marked
crosswalk on road crossing behaviour and perceptions of the environment”.
Transportation research, Transportation research part F 15,249-260.
7. Eleonora Papadimitriou, Athanasios Theofilatos, George Yannis (2012). “An
Analysing the perceptions of pedestrians and drivers to shared space”
Transportation research, Transportation research part F 15,297-310.
8. Fauzul Rizal Sutiknoa, Surjonoa, and Eddi Basuki Kurniawana. (2013).
“Walkability and pedestrian perceptions in Malang City emerging business
corridor”. Procedia environmental science, volume 17, 424-433.
9. Hongwei Guo, Facheng Zhao, Wuhong Wang, Yanlong Zhou, Yujie Zhang, and
Geert Wets. (2014). “Modeling the Perceptions and Preferences of Pedestrians on
Crossing Facilities” Hindawi Publishing Corporation Discrete Dynamics in Nature
and Society, Volume 2014, Article ID 949475, page 8.
93
10. Ioannis Kaparias, Michael G.H. Bell, Ashkan Miri, Carol Chan. (2012). “Analysing
the perceptions of pedestrians and drivers to shared space”. Transportation
Research. Transportation Research Part F 15, 297–310.
11. Jibiao zhou, yanyong guo, sheng dong, li zhao, renfa yang (2016) “structural
Equation Modelling for Pedestrian’s Perception in Integrated Transport Hubs”
Procedia engineering, 137,817-826.
12. Jing Xu, Yan GE, Weina Qu, Xianghong Sun, Kan Zhang. (2018). “The mediating
effect of traffic safety climate between pedestrian inconvenience and pedestrian
behaviour”. Accident Analysis and prevention. 119,155-161.
13. Khaled Shaaban, Deepti Muley, Abdulla Mohammed (2018), “Analysis of illegal
pedestrian crossing behaviour on a major divided arterial road”. Transportation
research. Transportation research part F 54, 124-137.
14. Kodavanti Venkata Raghavendra Ravishankar a, Parvathy Maheswari Nair. (2018).
“Pedestrian risk analysis at uncontrolled midblock and unsignalised intersections”.
Journal of traffic and transportation engineering, 1-11.
15. National crime research bureau ministry of home affairs (NCRB), 2016.Accidental
Deaths and Suicide in India.
16. Papadimitriou a, Sylvain Lassarreb, George Yannisa “Introducing human factors in
pedestrian crossing behaviour models”. Transportation research, Transportation
Research part F 36,69-82.
17. Pengyun Zhao, Guangquan Lu2, and Liming Liang, (2018). “Perception and
Response Characteristics of Pedestrian-Vehicle Traffic Conflict at Unsignalized
Intersections under Driving Distraction”. CICTP 2018 ASCE.
18. Peña-García, A. Hurtado, M.C. Aguilar, (2015). “Impact of public lighting on
pedestrians’ perception of safety and well-being”. Safety science, 78, 142-148.
19. Road accidents in India- 2015, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways,
Government of India, 2016.
20. Serag M.S(2014) “Modelling pedestrian road crossing at uncontrolled mid-block
locations in developing countries”, International Journal of Civil and Structural
Engineering. Volume 4, no 3.
21. Shalini Rankavata, Geetam Tiwarib. (2016). “Pedestrians risk perception of traffic
crash and built environment features – Delhi, India”. Safety science. 87, 1-7.
22. Tova Rosenbloom, Roi mandel, Yotam Rosner, Ehud Eldror. (2015). “Hazard
perception test for pedestrian”. Accident Analysis and prevention.79, 160-169.
94
23. Venkatesh Balasubramanian and Rahul Bhardwaj, (2017). “Pedestrians’ perception
and response towards vehicles during road-crossing at night time”. Accident
Analysis and Prevantion.110, 128-135.
24. V.P. Sisiopiku and, D. Akin (2014). “Pedestrian behaviour’s at and perceptions
towards various pedestrian facilities: an examination based on observation and
survey data”. Transportation Research. Transportation Research part F. 249-274.
25. Ying Ni, yingying Cao, Keping Li, (2017). “Pedestrians' Safety Perception at
Signalized Intersections in Shanghai”. Transportation Research Procedia. 25C,
1960-1968.
Book
Kadiyali R. L. “Traffic Engineering and Transport planning”. 8th Edition, Khanna Publishers,
2013.
Standard codes
Indian Road Congress, “guideline for pedestrian facilities”, IRC Code of Practices, vol.
103,2012.
95
ANNEXURES
Questionnaire survey form
P.G. SECTION IN TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM ENGINEERING
BVM ENGINEERING COLLEGE VALLABH VIDYANAGAR, ANAND
388120. &
P.G. SECTION IN TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING & PLANNING
SVNIT, SURAT-395007.
DISSERTATION PROJECT: Empirical Analysis of Pedestrian's Perception
At Undesignated Pedestrian Crossing Location at Midblock Section
Sample No_______ Date & Day_________________ Time________ location ___________
Section A Socio-Economical Characteristics
1. Gender: Male/Female 2. Age: _______Year
3. Education: Less than SSC SSC HSC Graduation Above graduation
4. Purpose:  Work  Education  Recreation other _____________
5. Frequency of road crossing: Daily Occasionally Other, Specify if _________
Section B Pedestrian Crossing Characteristics
6. Dressing: Male: Normal Traditional Female: Casual Punjabi dress Saree
Other 7. Mobiles use while crossing: Yes No
8. Accompanied child: Yes Number of children No
9. Group sizes (no of pedestrian in groups): ______
10. Carrying baggage: Yes In one hand In two hand No
11. Walking style: Walk Brisk walk Run Walk + Run
12. Frequency of walking with this style: _______
13. Initiation of crossing: curb-side Median-side
Variables Perceived Actual
14.Waiting time (in second): < 0.5 0.05 to 5 5 to 12
12 to 25 25 to 45 > 45
15.Waiting time with
accompanied person (in
second):
16.Pedestrian speed change: Yes, +ve -ve No Yes +ve -ve No
17.Crossing patterns: Perpendicular Rolling Perpendicular Rolling

Zig-zag Oblique Zig-zag Oblique
18.No of unsuccessful attempts:
19.Lane interacting: Curb lane Middle lane Curb lane Middle lane
Shoulder lane Shoulder lane
20.Stage of crossing(Numbers):
21.Lateral distance from < 0.25 0.25 to 1.50
vehicle (Distance In meter): 1.50 to 3.50 3.50 to 5
5 to 6.50 6.50
22.longitudinal distance from <3 3 to 12 12 to 19
vehicles (Distance in meter): 19 to 25 25 to 35 >35
23.Crossing time (Time in < 2.5 2.5 to 8 8 to12
second):
96
12 to19.05 19.5 to 60
> 65
24.Use of force gap Yes, how often ______ Yes,
Types of approaching types of approaching
vehicles No vehicles No
25.Preference of vehicle while 2W 3W SC BC
crossing: LCV HCV Bus
26.Vehicles yielding by lane Yes No Yes No
change:
27.Vehicles yielding by speed Yes No Yes No
change:
28.Gap accepted: Lag Gap Accepted gap sized _________ Rejected gap sized _______
29.Which type of Vehicles interact during the crossing:
2w 3w SC BC LCV HCV Bus
30.Vehicle speed: _________________ kmph 28. Traffic volume: ______________Veh/hr
31.How safe you feel when you cross the road at undesignated crossing section?
32.How safe you feel when you are alone?
33.How safe you feel when you are in group?
34.Rate the risk you have taken during crossing at the cross-walk?
35.How do you feel when you cross the road at cross-walk?
Very alert Alert Anger Fear Relax
36.Overall rating of your experienced during road crossing ____________
Excellent Very good Good Poor Very poor
37. Which facility you preferer for road crossing? Under pass Foot over bridge Zebra
crossing Traffic signals Policemen standing Cross anywhere randomly Table top
38.14 ________
39. Under pass, FOB near your crossing location?
Yes, why you not using that? __________ NO, if provided you will use? _________
40. Which factors do you think creates the most unsafe condition?
Lack of signal, marking & infrastructure less priority given by drivers for pedestrian
41.Are you aware of the existing laws pertaining to crossing? Yes No
42.How safe do you feel when you cross the road in traffic condition show in figure 1 to 6?
Fig.1 Extremely unsafe Unsafe Moderate safe Safe Extremely safe
Optional:
Name:
Email id:
Phone number
“Thank you for taking out your valuable time to answer these questions"
97
Fig 1. Foot over bridge Fig 2. Under pass
Fig 3 Managed by traffic police Fig 4. Zebra crossing
Fig 5 Traffic signal Fig 6 Table top
98
Figure – 1 (LOS-A) Figure – 2 (LOS-B)
Figure – 3 (LOS-C) Figure – 4 (LOS-D)
Figure – 5 (LOS-E) Figure – 6 (LOS-F)
99
Revised Survey Form
P.G. SECTION IN TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING SYSTEM
BVM ENGINEERING COLLEGE VALLABH VIDYANAGAR, ANAND
P.G. SECTION IN TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING & PLANNING
SVNIT, SURAT.
DISSERTATION PROJECT: Empirical Analysis of Pedestrian's Perception
At Undesignated Pedestrian Crossing Location at Midblock Section
Sample No_______ Date & Day_________________ Time________ location ___________
Section A Socio-Economical Characteristics
1. Gender: 1. Male 2. Female 2. Age: _______Year
3. Education: 1. Less than SSC 2. SSC 3. HSC 4. Graduation 5. Above graduation
4. Purpose: 1. Work 2. Education 3. Recreation 4. other _____________
5. Frequency of road crossing: 1. Daily 2. Occasionally 3. Other, Specify if _________
Section B Pedestrian Crossing Characteristics
6. Frequency of walking with this style: 1. Daily 2. Occasionally 3. Other, Specify
Variables Perceived Actual
7.Waiting time (in second): 1. 0 2. 0.05 to 5 3. 5 to 12
4. 12 to 25 5. 25 to 45 6. > 45
8.Waiting time with
accompanied person
(in second):
9.Pedestrian speed change: 1. Yes, +ve -ve 2. No 1. Yes, +ve -ve 2. No
10.Crossing patterns: 1. Perpendicular 2. Rolling 1. Perpendicular 2. Rolling

3. Zig-zag 4. Oblique 3. Zig-zag 4. Oblique
11.No of unsuccessful attempts:
12.Lateral distance from 1. < 0.25 2. 0.25 to 1.50
vehicle (Distance In meter): 3.1.50 to 3.50 4. 3.50 to 5
5. 5 to 6.50 6. 6.50
13.Longitudinal distance from 1. <3 2. 3 to 12 3. 12 to 19
vehicles (Distance in meter): 4.19 to 25 5. 25 to 35 6. >35
14.Crossing time 1. < 2.5 2. 2.5 to 8 3. 8 to12
(Time in second): 4. 12 to19.05 5. 19.5 to 60
6. > 65
15.Use of force gap 1. Yes, how often ______ 1. Yes, how often ______
Types of approaching vehicles Types of approaching vehicles
2. No 2. No
16.Preference of vehicle while 1. 2W 2. 3W 3. SC 4. BC
crossing: 5. LCV 6. HCV 7. Bus
17.Vehicles yielding by lane 1. Yes 2. No 1. Yes 2. No
change:
18.Vehicles yielding by speed 1. Yes 2. No 1. Yes 2. No
change:
19. How safe you feel when you cross the road at undesignated crossing section?
1. Extremely unsafe 2. Unsafe 3. Moderate safe 4. Safe 5. Extremely safe
20. How safe you feel when you are alone?
21. How safe you feel when you are in group?
100
22. Rate the risk you have taken during crossing at the cross-walk
23. How do you feel when you cross the road at cross-walk?
1. Very alert 2. Alert 3. Anger 4. Fear 5. Relax
24. Overall rating of your experienced during road crossing ____________
1. Excellent 2. Very good 3. Good 4. Poor 5. Very poor
25. Which facility you preferer for road crossing?
1. Under pass 2. Foot over bridge 3. Zebra crossing 4. Traffic signals 5. Policemen standing
6. Cross anywhere randomly 7. Table top
26. What is your preferred distance to that facility? ________
27. Under pass, FOB near your crossing location?
1. Yes, why you not using that? __________ 2. NO, if provided you will use? _________
28. Which factors do you think creates the most unsafe condition?
1. Lack of signal, marking & infrastructure 2. less priority given by drivers for pedestrian
29. Are you aware of the existing laws pertaining to crossing? 1.Yes 2. No
30. How safe do you feel when you cross the road in traffic condition show in figure 1 to 6?
Fig.1 1. Extremely unsafe 2. Unsafe 3. Moderate safe 4. Safe 5. Extremely safe
Optional:
Name:
Email id:
Phone number:
“Thank you for taking out your valuable time to answer these questions"
101
PAPER PUBLICATION
102
REVIEW CARD
Dissertation Phase-I
Sr.no Comment Compliance
1.
Reduce the Questionnaire survey form Done
2. Done
Development of model specified
Dissertation Phase-II
1.
Carry out detail descriptive analysis Done
2.
Formulate conclusion Done
(Prof. P. N. Patel) (Dr. L.B. Zala)
103
104
PLAGIARISM SUMMARY
105
106

DP Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DP Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

DP Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A

Prof. P. N. Patel Prof. (Dr) L. B. Zala

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Place: Vallabh Vidyanagar

(Prof. Pinakin. N. Patel) (Dr. L.B. Zala)

Head, (Civil Engineering) Principal

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Place: Vallabh Vidyanagar

(Prof. Pinakin N. Patel) (Dr. L.B. Zala)

Head, Civil Engineering Principal

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

(Prof. Pinakin N. Patel) (Dr. L.B. Zala)

Head, Civil Engineering Principal

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

Place: Vallabh Vidyanagar

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING

BHAVESHKUMAR NATVARBHAI PARMAR

COMPLIANCE CERTIFICATE ......................................................................................... iii

PAPER PUBLICATION CERTIFICATE ........................................................................... iv

DISSERTATION APPROVAL CERTIFICATE ................................................................. v

DECLARATION OF ORIGINALITY ................................................................................. vi

LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................ xi

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................ xiv

ABSTRACT ........................................................................................................................... xvi

1.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 2

1.2 Need for the Study .......................................................................................................... 4

1.3 Aim of the Study ............................................................................................................. 5

1.4 Objectives of the Study .................................................................................................. 5

1.5 Scope of the Study .......................................................................................................... 5

1.6 Study Methodology: ....................................................................................................... 6

1.7 Organization of Dissertation Report ............................................................................ 7

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW .............................................................................. 8

2.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 9

2.2 Literature Review ........................................................................................................... 9

2.3 Latent Variables: .......................................................................................................... 26

2.4 Latent Variable Model: ............................................................................................... 29

CHAPTER 3: STUDY AREA PROFILE ........................................................................... 30

3.1 Surat City Profile ......................................................................................................... 31

3.2 Ahmedabad City Profile .............................................................................................. 34

4.1 Background ................................................................................................................... 38

4.2 Data Collection ............................................................................................................. 38

4.3 Site Selection ................................................................................................................. 38

4.4 Questionnaire and Videography Survey .................................................................... 39

4.5 Data Extraction ............................................................................................................ 45

4.6 Step 1 Questionnaire Survey Form Data Extraction ................................................ 45

4.7 Step 2 Video Graphical Data Extraction.................................................................... 46

4.8 Step 3 Prepared SPSS Data and Variable Sheet ....................................................... 47

CHAPTER 5: DATA ANALYSIS ........................................................................................ 49

5.1 Background ................................................................................................................... 50

5.2 Socio-Economics Characteristics ................................................................................ 50

5.3 Pedestrian Characteristics .......................................................................................... 51

5.4 Pedestrian Crossing Characteristics........................................................................... 54

5.5 Pedestrian Behaviour Characteristics ........................................................................ 56

5.6 Traffic Characteristics ................................................................................................. 59

5.7 Pedestrian safety analysis ............................................................................................ 64

CHAPTER 06 STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODELLING ........................................... 73

6.1 Background ................................................................................................................... 74

6.2 Expletory Factor Analysis ........................................................................................... 76

U = - 3.981 + 2.701GAP + 6.423RGAP + 3.2FATM – 0.301VSPEED,