Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Journal of Advanced Transportation
Volume 2018, Article ID 3296285, 8 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/3296285
Research Article

Choice Behavior of the Elderly Regarding Street-Crossing Facility

MOE Key Laboratory for Urban Transportation Complex Systems Theory and Technology, School of Traffic and Transportation, Beijing Jiaotong University, Beijing 100044, China

Correspondence should be addressed to Chong Wei; nc.ude.utjb@iewhc

Received 15 August 2017; Revised 23 November 2017; Accepted 14 December 2017; Published 4 January 2018

Academic Editor: Ángel Ibeas

Copyright © 2018 Chong Wei et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. L. Asher, M. Aresu, E. Falaschetti, and J. Mindell, “Most older pedestrians are unable to cross the road in time: a cross-sectional study,” Age and Ageing, vol. 41, no. 5, pp. 690–694, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. P. W. Kong, Y. K. Chua, C. Y. Ooi, and Y. J. Sim, “Challenges of adequate road crossing time for older persons: A pilot study in Singapore,” Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, vol. 61, no. 7, pp. 1226-1227, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. A. Dommes, V. Cavallo, and J. Oxley, “Functional declines as predictors of risky street-crossing decisions in older pedestrians,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 59, pp. 135–143, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. M. Räsänen, T. Lajunen, F. Alticafarbay, and C. Aydin, “Pedestrian self-reports of factors influencing the use of pedestrian bridges,” Accident Analysis & Prevention, vol. 39, no. 5, pp. 969–973, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. C. Havard and A. Willis, “Effects of installing a marked crosswalk on road crossing behaviour and perceptions of the environment,” Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 249–260, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. R. C. Munoz-Raskin and A. Sarasti, “Footbridges or “foolbridges”? analysis of efficacy of three pedestrian bridges as a tool for road safety in Panama city,” in Proceedings of the Transportation Research Board 87th Annual Meeting Compendium of Papers DVD, 2008.
  7. R. Anciaes P and P. Jones, “Estimating preferences for different types of pedestrian crossing facilities,” Transportation Research F: Psychology and Behavior, 2017. View at Google Scholar
  8. N. Y. Tilahun, D. M. Levinson, and K. J. Krizek, “Trails, lanes, or traffic: valuing bicycle facilities with an adaptive stated preference survey,” Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 287–301, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  9. T. Iryo, M. Asano, S. Odani, and S. Izumi, “Examining factors of walking disutility for microscopic pedestrian model – a virtual reality approach,” Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 80, pp. 940–959, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  10. R. L. Knoblauch, M. T. Pietrucha, and M. Nitzburg, “Field studies of pedestrian walking speed and start-up time,” Transportation Research Record, no. 1538, pp. 27–38, 1996. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. S. Hess, J. M. Rose, and J. Polak, “Non-trading, lexicographic and inconsistent behaviour in stated choice data,” Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, vol. 15, no. 7, pp. 405–417, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. MCMCglmm package. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/MCMCglmm/.