1. Individual differences in road crossing ability in young children and adults Student: 董瑩蟬

2. Purpose This paper want to investigated the different age group and gender on the road crossing ability. This experiment process used video file to collect data.

3. Reference During 1980s the child pedestrian accident higher than adult. Piaget (1969,1970) found the child under 10 years older which they can’t correct decision the traffic situation (ex: speed and distance). Wilkening (1981) give subject two information (ex: distance speed and time) require they infer the value of third.

4. Reference Some studies found that the child which age between 5 to 9 years old has higher accident risk. (Cross, 1988; cross et al.,1988, Kenchington et al,1977) Some studies found the child and adults has similar result on the infer arrival time. (Vinje, 1982a; Hoffman et al.,1980)

5. Method The test site which was some study sites. For example Demetre et al.,1992,1993 and so on. And previous studies found the adult and child crossing time. So this paper defined the unsafe gap and miss gap according those studies. The sites was a two-lane road, speed limit of 48 Kph

6. Method Subjects –Children 30 person (12G,18B), mean=7.1 –Adults 36 (18F,18M),mean=20.5 Equipment –Video-cassette recorder –Split-screen (Panasonic WJ/S1E)

7. Method Independent variable –Age: children and adults –Gender Dependent variable –Number of Crossings –Unsafe gap (gap time less than 5.5 seconds) –Missed opportunities (gap time more than 8.25 second) –Mean gap size accepted (crossing gap) –Mean delay (decision gap) –Percentage of safe crossing –The delay/gap correlation

8. Method Process –Subject stand in front of video screens (see Fig 1) –When they want to crossing road, they press the response button –Subject saw all film twice Analyses –Independent t tests –ANOVA

9. Method

10. Result-independent t test For adult,The gender are only significant at mean delay. There was some significant different for children. There was some significant different for age.

11. Result-ANOVA

12. The ANOVA analysis result found that the age has significantly. Mean delay and total number of crossing are significantly at age group. (F=6.44, P<0.02 ; F=4.39, P<0.05) The female has less crossing times, and longer delay time.

13. Result- intercorrelation

14. Result-factor analysis

16. There are more than 50% for both cases at factor 1 at all group. Factor 2 is most strongly defined by a high negative loading for delay/gap correlation variable. Factor 3 for the mean delay has high negative loading at adult.

17. Result

18. Discussion There were some different in gender which include male cross more frequent and delay less at the road. (Foot et al.,1982; Messer, 1976). The mean delay time was different between adult and child, the child delay time was 2.68 and adult was 0.14,but Demetre et al.(1992) no evidence.

19. Conclusion The adult has higher safe crossing road than child. It explained the adult has better perceptuo-motor ability. The man and boy has higher total number of crossing. But miss and mean delay significant only in children.

20. My comment This paper used intercorrelations, factor analysis and Multiple regression analysis, which was few used with related research. This paper conclusion the gender has some different on the road crossing, the similar to D. Yagil(2000) and Owen et al.(2003)

21. My comment This paper investigated the child and adult group different on the road crossing. It found the child has higher risk than adult, it similar to Gordon et al.(2003).