Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Essex, , Colchester CO4 3SQ, UK.
J R Soc Interface. 2013 Nov 20;11(91):20130904. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2013.0904. Print 2014 Feb 6.
The evacuation of crowds from buildings or vehicles is one example that highlights the importance of understanding how individual-level interactions and decision-making combine and lead to the overall behaviour of crowds. In particular, to make evacuations safer, we need to understand how individuals make movement decisions in crowds. Here, we present an evacuation experiment with over 500 participants testing individual behaviour in an interactive virtual environment. Participants had to choose between different exit routes under the influence of three different types of directional information: static information (signs), dynamic information (movement of simulated crowd) and memorized information, as well as the combined effect of these different sources of directional information. In contrast to signs, crowd movement and memorized information did not have a significant effect on human exit route choice in isolation. However, when we combined the latter two treatments with additional directly conflicting sources of directional information, for example signs, they showed a clear effect by reducing the number of participants that followed the opposing directional information. This suggests that the signals participants observe more closely in isolation do not simply overrule alternative sources of directional information. Age and gender did not consistently explain differences in behaviour in our experiments.
从建筑物或车辆中疏散人群就是一个很好的例子，它强调了理解个体层面的相互作用和决策如何结合并导致人群整体行为的重要性。特别是，为了使疏散更加安全，我们需要了解个人在人群中如何做出移动决策。在这里，我们进行了一项疏散实验，有 500 多名参与者在互动虚拟环境中测试个体行为。参与者必须在三种不同类型的方向信息（静态信息（标志）、动态信息（模拟人群的移动）和记忆信息）的影响下，选择不同的出口路线，以及这些不同方向信息源的综合影响。与标志不同，人群移动和记忆信息在孤立状态下对人类出口路线选择没有显著影响。然而，当我们将后两种处理方式与其他直接冲突的方向信息源（例如标志）结合起来时，它们通过减少跟随相反方向信息的参与者数量，显示出了明显的效果。这表明参与者在孤立状态下更密切观察的信号不会简单地推翻其他方向信息源。在我们的实验中，年龄和性别并不能始终解释行为差异。
