Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 56
56 70 Time Between Pedestrian Arrival and 60 Bus Arrival (minutes) 50 40 30 20 10 0 0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0 Crossing Speed (ft/s) Figure 30. Crossing speed of 53 pedestrians who boarded transit by wait time. sponding P-values. The P-value for the coefficient estimate of was the midblock signal; this was because a substantial num- Log (wait time in seconds) is 0.0731, which is at the border- ber of pedestrians tended to look before approaching the line. At = 0.05, the linear relationship between crossing pushbutton to activate the signal. After activating the signal, speed and Log (rider wait time) is not significant, but it is at they only watched for the signal indication to cross. The = 0.1. The prediction equation is given as remaining treatments all had about two-thirds or greater of crossing pedestrians looking both ways, except for high- Crossing speed = 6.9075 × 0.3107 Log (wait time in seconds) visibility markings and passive overhead beacons, which had Table 27 shows the R-square value of 0.06 and the adjusted a high percentage of unknowns. R-square value of 0.04 for the fit in Table 26. As shown in Fig- ure 30, there is considerable variability in crossing speed, which leads to the very low R-square value in Table 27. Pedestrian Crosswalk Use Each crossing pedestrian was coded into one of the follow- ing categories, showing Pedestrian Visual Search Each crossing pedestrian was coded into one of the follow- · 0--crossed within the crosswalk markings or within 10 ft (3.1 ing categories: m) of the crosswalk markings for most of the crossing event, · 1--crossed between 10 and 50 ft (3.1 and 15 m) of the · Looked for oncoming vehicles in each direction (B), crosswalk markings, · Looked for oncoming vehicle in one direction only (O), · 2--crossed greater than 50 ft (15 m) from the crosswalk · Did not look for oncoming traffic in either direction (N), markings, or or · X--data could not be determined from the video. · Data could not be determined from the video (X). Table 29 shows the crosswalk use by treatment. Each Table 28 contains the distribution of pedestrian visual treatment that showed a red indication to the motorist search by treatment. The only treatment where pedestrians (e.g., Half, HAWK, or Msig) had between 90 and 95 percent only looked in one direction more than 3 percent of the time of the pedestrian crossings within 10 ft (3.1 m) of the crosswalk. Table 27. Summary of fit in Table 26. Table 26. Least squares fit for crossing speed. RSquare 0.06163 Term Parameter Std Error t Ratio Prob>|t| RSquare Adjusted 0.04323 Estimate Root Mean Square Error 1.672732 Intercept 6.9075201 0.962458 7.18 <0.0001 Mean of Response 5.196981 Log(Wait time in seconds) 0.310708 0.169769 1.83 0.0731 Observations (or Sum Weights) 53