Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Guidance for the Model User on Representing Human Behavior in Egress Models

  • Published:
Fire Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Structures are currently designed and constructed in accordance with prescriptive and performance-based (PBD) methodologies to ensure a certain level of occupant safety during fire emergencies. The performance-based approach requires the quantification of both ASET (Available Safe Egress Time) and RSET (Required Safe Egress Time) to determine the degree of safety provided. This article focuses on the RSET side of the equation, for which a fire protection or fire safety engineer would use some type of egress modelling approach to estimate evacuation performance. Often, simple engineering equations are applied to estimate the RSET value. Over time, more sophisticated computational tools have appeared—that go beyond basic flow calculations; e.g. simulating individual agent movement. Irrespective of the approach adopted, appropriate and accurate representation of human behavior in response to fire within these approaches is limited, mainly due to the lack of a comprehensive conceptual model of evacuee decision-making and behavior during fire emergencies. This article initially presents the set of behavioral statements, or mini-theories, currently available from various fire and disaster studies, organized using the overarching theory of decision-making and human behavior in disasters. Once presented, guidance is provided on how these behavioral statements might be incorporated into an evacuation model, in order to better represent human behavior in fire within the safety analysis being performed. The intent here is to improve the accuracy of the results produced by performance-based calculations and analyses.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

(Source—[15] redrawn from p. 47)

Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The number and presentation of these statements has evolved since an earlier presentation [14].

  2. This list is by no means exhaustive, but represents the key behavioral conventions that are identified, understood, and employed within model development and engineering practice to some degree of frequency.

  3. An individual’s perception of their environment and the manner in which they may function within it is also address in Gibson’s theory of affordances [32].

References

  1. Department for Communities and Local Government (2006) Approved Document B(fire safety), vol 1. Dwelling Houses, The Building Regulations 2010, England, UK. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/fire-safety-approved-document-b. Accessed August 2013.

  2. Shook and Stone (2013) Small fire reported in the stratosphere hotel and Casino. http://www.shookandstone.com/Personal-Injury-Blog/2013/July/Small-Fire-Reported-in-the-Stratosphere-Hotel-an.aspx. Accessed July 2013.

  3. BuroHappold Engineering. http://www.burohappold.com/projects/project/o2-arena-and-millennium-dome-65/. Accessed June 2013.

  4. Durso F (2012), Upgrading liberty, NFPA journal, July/August. http://www.nfpa.org/newsandpublications/nfpa-journal/2012/july-august-2012/features/crowning-achievement. Accessed May 2012.

  5. Building Design + Construction (2013) Mall of America will double in size after $2.5 billion expansion. http://www.bdcnetwork.com/mall-america-will-double-size-after-25-billion-expansion. Accessed July 2013.

  6. Gwynne SMV, Rosenbaum ER (2009) Employing the hydraulic model in assessing emergency movement. In: DiNenno et al. (eds) SFPE handbook of fire protection engineering, 4th edn. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, pp 3–373–3–396.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Galea ER, Lawrence PJ, Gwynne S, Filippidis L, Blackshields D, Cooney D (2011) Buildingexodus v5.0, user/technical guide, University of Greenwich.

  8. Kuligowski ED, Peacock RD, Hoskins BA (2010) Review of building evacuation models. 2nd edn. TechNote 1680, NIST.

  9. Gwynne SMV (2012) Translating behavioral theory of human response into modeling practice. NISTGCR—12-972, National Institute of Standards and Technology.

  10. Kuligowski ED (2011) Terror defeated: occupant sensemaking, decision-making and protective action in the 2001 World Trade Center Disaster. University of Colorado, PhD Dissertation, http://gradworks.umi.com/3453742.pdf.

  11. Kuligowski, ED (2016) Human behavior in fire. In: Hurley MJ (ed) The SFPE handbook of fire protection engineering, 5th edn. Springer, New York, pp 2070–2114.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  12. Kuligowski ED (2009) The process of human behavior in fires. Technical note 1632, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg.

  13. Canter D (1980) Fires and human behaviour. Wiley, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Gwynne SMV, Hulse, LM, Kinsey MJ (2015) Guidance for the model developer on representing human behavior in egress models, fire technology. Springer, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Lindell MK, Perry RW (2004) Communicating environmental risk in multiethnic communities. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Sorensen JH, Vogt-Sorenson B (2006) Community processes: warning and evacuation. In: Rodriguez H, Quarantelli EL, Dynes RR (eds) Handbook of disaster research. Springer, New York, pp 183–199.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Mileti DS, Peek L (2001) Hazards and sustainable development in the United States. Risk Manag Int J 3(1):61–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tierney KJ, Lindell MK, Perry RW (2001) Facing the unexpected: disaster preparedness and response in the United States. Joseph Henry Press, Washington, DC.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Drabek TE (1986) Human system responses to disaster: an inventory of sociological findings. Springer, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  20. Mileti DS, Drabek TE, Haas JE (1975) Human systems in extreme environments: a sociological perspective. Institute of Behavioral Science, University of Colorado, Boulder.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Proulx G, Latour JC, MacLaurin JW (1994) Housing evacuation of mixed abilities occupants. IRC-IR-661, Internal Report, Institute for Research in Construction, National Research Council of Canada.

  22. Bruck D (2001) The who, what, where and why of waking to fire alarms: a review. Fire Saf J 36:623–639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990-ADA-42 U.S. Code Chapter 126.

  24. Mileti DS, Sorensen JH (1990) Communication of emergency public warnings: a social science perspective and state-of-the-art assessment. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of Energy, Oak Ridge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. Proulx G, Sime JD (1991) To prevent ‘Panic’ in an underground emergency: why not tell people the truth?. Fire Safety Sci 3:843–852. doi:10.3801/IAFSS.FSS.3-843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Okabe K, Mikami S (1982) A study on the socio-psychological effect of a false warning of the Tokai earthquake in Japan. A Paper presented at the Tenth World Congress of Sociology, Mexico City, Mexico.

  27. Helweg-Larsen M, Shepperd JA (2001) Do moderators of the optimistic bias affect personal or target risk estimates? a review of the literature. Personal Social Psychol Rev 5(1):74–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Klein G (1999) sources of power: how people make decisions. The MIT Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Latane B, Darley JM (1970) The unresponsive bystander: Why doesn’t he help? Appleton-Century Crofts, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Simon HA (1956) Rational choice and the structure of environment. Psychol Rev 63(2):129–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Sime J (1984) Escape behavior. In: Fire: panic’ or affiliation?, PhD Thesis, Department of Psychology, University Of Surrey.

  32. Gibson JJ (1977) The theory of affordances. In: Shaw R, Bransford J (eds) Perceiving, acting, and knowing: Toward an ecological psychology, 1st Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Nilsson D (2009) Exit choice in fire emergencies—influencing choice of exit with flashing lights, Lund University, Doctoral Thesis.

  34. Bryan JL (2002) Behavioral response to fire and smoke. In: DiNenno PJ (ed) The SFPE handbook of fire protection engineering, 3rd edn. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, pp 3–315–3–315.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Proulx G (2002) Movement of people: the evacuation timing. In DiNenno PJ (ed) The SFPE handbook of fire protection engineering, 3rd edn. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, pp 3–342–3–341.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Tong D, Canter D (1985) The decision to evacuate: a study of the motivations which contribute to evacuation in the event of fire. Fire Saf J 9(3):257–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Quarantelli EL, Dynes RR (1972) When disaster strikes (it isn’t much like what you’ve heard and read about). Psychol Today 5:67–70.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Fischer III HW (1998) Response to disaster: Fact versus fiction and its perpetuation, the sociology of disaster, 2nd edn. University Press of America, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Santos G, Aguirre BE (2004) Critical review of emergency evacuation simulation models. In: Peacock RD, Kuligowski ED (eds) Workshop on building occupant movement during fire emergencies. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, pp 27–52.

    Google Scholar 

  40. McPhail C (1991) The myth of the madding crowd. Walter de Gruyter, Inc., New York.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Gwynne S, Galea ER, Lawrence PJ, Owen M, Filippidis L (1999) A review of the methodologies used in the computer simulation of evacuation from the built environment. Build Environ 34:741–749.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Gwynne SMV (2007) Optimizing fire alarm notification for high risk groups. Summary Report, prepared for The Fire Protection Research Foundation, NFPA, Quincy, MA.

  43. Mileti DS (1974) A normative causal model analysis of disaster warning response. University of Colorado, Department of Sociology, Boulder.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Groner N (2009) A situation awareness analysis for the use of elevators during fire emergencies. In: 4th International Symposium on Human Behaviour in Fire: Conference Proceedings. London: Interscience Communications, pp 61–72.

  45. Perry RW, Lindell MK, Greene MR (1981) Evacuation planning in emergency management. Lexington Books, Lexington.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Kunreuther H (1991) A conceptual framework for managing low probability events. Center for Risk and Decision Processes, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Gwynne S, Galea ER, Lawrence PJ, Owen M, Filippidis L (1999) Adaptive decision-making in building EXODUS. J Appl Fire Sci 8:265–289.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Thompson CM, Forester JA, Cooper SE, Bley DC, Wreathall J (1997) The application of ATHEANA: a technique for human error analysis. In: Proceedings of the IEEE Sixth Annual Human Factors Meeting, pp 9–13-9–17.

  49. Turner RH, Killian LM (1987) Collective behavior, 3rd edn. Prentice Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Connell R (2001) Collective behavior in the September 11, 2001 evacuation of the World Trade Center. Preliminary Paper #313. University of Delaware Disaster Research Center, Newark.

  51. Karau SJ, Kelly JR (1992) The effects of time scarcity and time abundance on group performance quality and interaction process. J Exp Soc Psychol 28(6):542–571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Zakay D (1993) The impact of time perception processes on decision making under time stress. In: Svenson O, Maule AJ (eds) Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making. Plenum Press, New York, pp 59–72.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  53. Janis IL (1982) Decision making under stress. In: Goldberger L, Breznitz S (eds) Handbook of stress: theoretical and clinical aspects. The Free Press, New York, pp 69–87.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Ben Zur H, Breznitz SJ (1981) The effect of time pressure on risky choice behavior. Acta Psychologica 47(2):89–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Gigerenzer G, Selten R (2001) Bounded rationality: the adaptive toolbox. The MIT Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Vaughan D (1999) The dark side of organizations: mistake, misconduct, and disaster. Ann Rev Sociol 25:271–305.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S (1977) Behavioral decision theory. Ann Rev Psychol 28:1–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Peterson CR, Beach LR (1967) Man as an intuitive statistician. Psychol Bull 68(1):29–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  60. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Sci 185:1124–1131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Flin R, Salas E, Strub M, Martin L (1997) Decision making under stress. Ashgate Publishing Ltd, England.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Orasanu J, Fischer U (1997) Finding decisions in natural environments: the view from the cockpit. In: Zsambok C, Klein G (eds) Naturalistic decision making. Erlbaum, Mahwah, pp 343–358.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Janis IL, Mann L (1977) Decision making: a psychological analysis of conflict, choice, and commitment. Free Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Hammond KR, Adelman L (1976) Science, values, and human judgment. Science 194:389–396.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Slovic P, Kunreuther H, White GF (1974) Decision processes, rationality, and adjustments to natural hazards. In: GF White (ed) Natural hazards. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 187–205.

    Google Scholar 

  66. Averill JD, Mileti DS, Peacock RD, Kuligowski ED, Groner N, Proulx G, Reneke PA, Nelson HE (2005) Federal Building and fire safety investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster: occupant behavior, egress, and emergency communications. Report NCSTAR 1-7. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg. http://wtc.nist.gov/NISTNCSTAR1-7.pdf.

  67. Isner MS, Klem TJ (1993) World Trade Center explosion and fire, New York, New York, February 26, 1993. Fire Investigation Report. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy.

  68. Bryan, JL (1982) Human behavior in the MGM grand hotel fire. Fire J 76:37–48.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Best RL (1977) Reconstruction of a tragedy: the Beverly Hills supper club fire. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Fahy RF, Proulx G (1997) Human behavior in the World Trade Center evacuation. In: Hasemi Y (ed) Fire safety science—Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium. London: Interscience Communications Ltd, pp 713–724.

  71. Mileti DS, O’Brien PW (1992) Warnings during disasters: normalizing communicated risk. Soc Probl 39(1):40–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Aguirre BE, Wenger D, Vigo G (1998) A test of the emergent norm theory of collective behavior. Sociol Forum 13(2):301–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Nilsson, D, Fahy, R (2016) Selecting scenarios for deterministic fire safety engineering analysis: life safety for occupants. In: Hurley MJ (ed) The SFPE handbook of fire protection engineering, Fifth edn. Springer, New York, pp 2047–2069.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  74. Gwynne, SMV, Boyce KE (2016) Engineering data. In: Hurley MJ (ed) The SFPE handbook of fire protection engineering, 5th edn. Springer, New York, pp 2429–2551.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Kuligowski would like to thank Richard Peacock, Therese McAllister, Jason Averill, and Enrico Ronchi for their contributions during the NIST review process. Gwynne would like to thank Ahmed Kashef, Cameron McCartney and Lisette Seguin for their contributions during the NRC review process.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD, USA

    Erica D. Kuligowski

  2. National Research Council Canada, Ottawa, Canada

    Steven M. V. Gwynne

  3. Arup, London, UK

    Michael J. Kinsey

  4. University of Greenwich, London, UK

    Lynn Hulse

Authors
  1. Erica D. Kuligowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Steven M. V. Gwynne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael J. Kinsey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lynn Hulse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erica D. Kuligowski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kuligowski, E.D., Gwynne, S.M.V., Kinsey, M.J. et al. Guidance for the Model User on Representing Human Behavior in Egress Models. Fire Technol 53, 649–672 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-016-0586-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-016-0586-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation