Collision avoidance with multiple walkers: Sequential or simultaneous interactions?

11Citations
Citations of this article
43Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Collision avoidance between multiple walkers, such as pedestrians in a crowd, is based on a reciprocal coupling between the walkers with a continuous loop between perception and action. Such interpersonal coordination has previously been studied in the case of dyadic locomotor interactions. However, when walking through a crowd of people, collision avoidance is not restricted to dyadic interactions. We examined how dyadic avoidance (1 vs. 1) compared to triadic avoidance (1 vs. 2). Additionally, we examined how the dynamics of a passable gap between two walkers affected locomotor interactions. To this end, we manipulated the starting formation of two walkers that formed a potentially pass-able gap for the other walker. We analyzed the interactions in terms of the evolution over time of the Minimal Predicted Distance and the Dynamics of the Gap, which both provide information about what action is afforded (i.e., passing in front/behind and the pass-ability of the gap). Results showed that some triadic interactions invited for sequential interactions, resulting in avoidance strategies comparable with dyadic interactions. However, some formations resulted in simultaneous interactions where the dynamics of the pass-ability of the gap revealed that the coordination strategy emerged over time through the bi-directional interactions between all walkers. Future work should address which circumstances invite for simultaneous and which for sequential interactions between multiple walkers. This study contributed toward understanding how collision is avoided between multiple walkers at the level of the local interactions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Meerhoff, L. A., Pettré, J., Lynch, S. D., Crétual, A., & Olivier, A. H. (2018). Collision avoidance with multiple walkers: Sequential or simultaneous interactions? Frontiers in Psychology, 9(NOV). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02354

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