How was your Crossing Experience? Development of a Pedestrian Satisfaction with Unsignalized Crossings Scale

1Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Unsignalized pedestrian crossing accommodations can improve pedestrian safety, yet their quality of service for pedestrians remains understudied. The present study explored whether and how pedestrians’ satisfaction with crossing unsignalized crossings varied according to the type of crossing accommodation used, that is, the rectangular rapid-flashing beacon (RRFB) with median island, median island alone, marked crosswalk, and unmarked crosswalk. The research team collected intercept survey and video observation data from 358 pedestrians across a total of 40 sites in two different cities. Structural equation models illustrated how pedestrians’ crossing-oriented satisfaction was shaped by their positive perceptions of safety and low levels of delay in the act of crossing the street. Crossing satisfaction also varied by unsignalized crossing accommodation type. Pedestrians perceived RRFBs with medians and median islands by themselves as comparably safer, more time efficient, and thus more satisfying than marked crosswalks without RRFBs or raised medians or at unmarked crosswalks. These findings could inform efforts to provide higher quality of service to pedestrians.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

LaJeunesse, S., Kumfer, W., Kothuri, S., Nordback, K., & McNeil, N. (2025). How was your Crossing Experience? Development of a Pedestrian Satisfaction with Unsignalized Crossings Scale. Transportation Research Record, 2679(2), 1762–1776. https://doi.org/10.1177/03611981241271598

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free