Scholarlink

<p>A high proportion of rail road grade crossing (RRGC) crashes are fatal, making road user safety at RRGCs one of the most serious concerns. These crashes are primarily the result of collisions between road users (both motorists and non-motorist) and trains, which are primarily brought on by violations. Road users usually break the law in a predictable pattern. A portion of them may not violate the RRGC, while others do so occasionally, while some of them regularly violate the RRGC. Hence, this study aims to figure out the contributing factors that significantly influence the recurrence of violations (ROV) committed by motorized and non-motorized users. In this regard, a detailed questionnaire-based survey was conducted at 21 distinct RRGCs located across nine Indian states, generating 5243 responses from motorists and 1965 responses from non-motorists (<i>n</i> = 7208). This database was first used for descriptive statistical analysis. The results showed that, compared to motorists, non-motorists account for the highest percentage of regular violations, and a significant proportion of pedestrians and bicyclists attempt to beat the incoming train, they position themselves in the most perilous situation. After that, separate violation models were developed for motorized and non-motorized road users. The results showed that several socio-economic attributes, travel-related factors, and road users’ behavior influence the ROV significantly at RRGCs for both motorists and non-motorists. However, age, marital status, times of the day &amp; checking for incoming trains were found insignificant for motorists’ ROV. In contrast, for non-motorists, driving experience, marital status, times of the day &amp; unintentional trespassing were statistically insignificant. Additionally, compared to all the factors, engagement in secondary activities emerges as the most significant one. Planners and policymakers can use the findings mentioned above to choose suitable interventions to improve safety for motorists and non-motorists at RRGCs.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Perception based investigation exploring recurrence of violations by motorist and non-motorist at rail road grade crossings

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年11月5日

查看全文
  • Adheesh Kumar Vivek,
  • Smruti Sourava Mohapatra,
  • Tathagatha Khan

摘要

A high proportion of rail road grade crossing (RRGC) crashes are fatal, making road user safety at RRGCs one of the most serious concerns. These crashes are primarily the result of collisions between road users (both motorists and non-motorist) and trains, which are primarily brought on by violations. Road users usually break the law in a predictable pattern. A portion of them may not violate the RRGC, while others do so occasionally, while some of them regularly violate the RRGC. Hence, this study aims to figure out the contributing factors that significantly influence the recurrence of violations (ROV) committed by motorized and non-motorized users. In this regard, a detailed questionnaire-based survey was conducted at 21 distinct RRGCs located across nine Indian states, generating 5243 responses from motorists and 1965 responses from non-motorists (n = 7208). This database was first used for descriptive statistical analysis. The results showed that, compared to motorists, non-motorists account for the highest percentage of regular violations, and a significant proportion of pedestrians and bicyclists attempt to beat the incoming train, they position themselves in the most perilous situation. After that, separate violation models were developed for motorized and non-motorized road users. The results showed that several socio-economic attributes, travel-related factors, and road users’ behavior influence the ROV significantly at RRGCs for both motorists and non-motorists. However, age, marital status, times of the day & checking for incoming trains were found insignificant for motorists’ ROV. In contrast, for non-motorists, driving experience, marital status, times of the day & unintentional trespassing were statistically insignificant. Additionally, compared to all the factors, engagement in secondary activities emerges as the most significant one. Planners and policymakers can use the findings mentioned above to choose suitable interventions to improve safety for motorists and non-motorists at RRGCs.