Advertisement

Experimental Brain Research

, Volume 236, Issue 12, pp 3169–3179 | Cite as

Avoidance behaviours of young adults during a head-on collision course with an approaching person

  • Lana M. Pfaff
  • Michael E. CinelliEmail author
Research Article
  • 77 Downloads

Abstract

Individuals use visual information to guide their avoidance behaviours. More specifically, individuals may directly perceive the time prior to colliding with an approaching obstacle (i.e., time to contact, TTC) to determine when to avoid. In addition, individuals use body-scaled information to control their movements. These avoidance behaviours differ when avoiding a human obstacle compared to an inanimate object. As such, the purpose of this experiment was to examine the avoidance behaviours of individuals during a head-on collision course with an approaching person. Young adults (N = 20, \(\bar {x}\) = 22.25 ± 1.5 years, 10 males) were instructed to walk along a 10 m path towards a goal located along the midline. A female confederate positioned along the midline walked towards the participants to one of the four predetermined final positions: (1) along the midline in the participants’ starting position; (2) stopped along the midline 2.5 m from her starting position; (3) to the left of the participants’ starting position; and (4) to the right of the participants’ starting position. Results revealed when the path of the confederate was certain, individuals used a greater TTC to determine when to change their path in comparison with when the path of the confederate was uncertain. Males were found to avoid significantly earlier (i.e., larger TTC) than females. However, following a change in path, sex did not impact the avoidance behaviours of the groups, but rather, the environment was the regulating factor.

Keywords

Human locomotion Motor behaviour Obstacle avoidance Perception–action integration Time to contact 

Notes

Funding

Funding was provided by Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Grant no. 2014-05288).

References

  1. Beaulieu C (2004) Intercultural study of personal space: a case study. J Appl Soc Psychol 34:794–805.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2004.tb02571.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Christman S, Naegele P (1995) Visual search as a function of retinal locus of target. In: Annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Los AngelesGoogle Scholar
  3. Cinelli ME, Patla AE (2007) Travel path conditions dictate the manner in which individuals avoid collisions. Gait Posture 26:186–193.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2006.08.012 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Cinelli ME, Patla AE, Allard F (2009) Behaviour and gaze analyses during a goal-directed locomotor task. Q J Exp Psychol (Hove) 62:483–499.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210802168583 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cisek P (2007) Cortical mechanisms of action selection: the affordance competition hypothesis. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 362:1585–1599.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2054 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. Fajen BR (2013) Guiding locomotion in complex, dynamic environments. Front Behav Neurosci 7:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fnbeh.2013.00085 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fajen BR, Warren WH (2003) Behavioral dynamics of steering, obstable avoidance, and route selection. J Exp Psychol: Hum Percept Perform 29(2):343–362.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.29.2.343 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gérin-Lajoie M, Richards CL, McFadyen BJ (2005) The negotiation of stationary and moving obstructions during walking: anticipatory locomotor adaptations and preservation of personal space. Mot Control 9:242–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gérin-Lajoie M, Richards CL, Fung J, McFadyen BJ (2008) Characteristics of personal space during obstacle circumvention in physical and virtual environments. Gait Posture 27:239–247.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2007.03.015 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Gibson J (1979) The ecological approach to visual perception. Houghton Mifflin Company, BostonGoogle Scholar
  11. Hackney AL, Vallis LA, Cinelli ME (2013) Action strategies of individuals during aperture crossing in nonconfined space. Q J Exp Psychol 66:1104–1112.  https://doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.730532 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hackney AL, Cinelli ME, Frank JS (2015) Does the passability of apertures change when walking through human versus pole obstacles? Acta Psychol (Amst) 162:62–68.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2015.10.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Higuchi T, Murai G, Kijima A et al (2011) Athletic experience influences shoulder rotations when running through apertures. Hum Mov Sci 30:534–549.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humov.2010.08.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Hollands MA, Marple-Horvat DE, Henkes S, Rowan AK (1995) Human eye movements during visually guided stepping. J Mot Behav 27:155–163.  https://doi.org/10.1080/00222895.1995.9941707 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Hollands M, Patla A, Vickers J (2002) “Look where you’re going!”: gaze behaviour associated with maintaining and changing the direction of locomotion. Exp Brain Res 143:221–230.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-001-0983-7 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Knowles ES, Kreuser B, Haas S et al (1976) Group size and the extension of social space boundaries. J Pers Soc Psychol 33:647–654.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.33.5.647 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kostelyanets NB, Kamenkovich VM, Sharaev GA (1992) Two mechanisms of recognition of the direction of motion in humans. Sens Syst 6:59–63Google Scholar
  18. Lee DN (1974) Visual information during locomotion. In: MacLeod RB, Pick HL (eds) Perception: essays in honor of James J. Gibson. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, USGoogle Scholar
  19. Lee DN (1976) A theory of visual control of braking based on information about time-to-collision. Perception 5:437–459.  https://doi.org/10.1068/p050437 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Lee DN, Lishman JR, Thomson JA (1982) Regulation of gait in long jumping. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 8:448–459.  https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.8.3.448 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Olivier AH, Marin A, Crétual A, Pettré J (2012) Minimal predicted distance: a common metric for collision avoidance during pairwise interactions between walkers. Gait Posture 36:399–404.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaitpost.2012.03.021 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Patla AE (1998) How is human gait controlled by vision. Ecol Psychol 10:287–302.  https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326969eco103&%23x0026;4_7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Patla AE, Vickers JN (2003) How far ahead do we look when required to step on specific locations in the travel path during locomotion? Exp Brain Res 148:133–138.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-002-1246-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Pedersen DM, Heaston AB (1972) The effects of sex of subject, sex of approaching person, and angle of approach upon personal space. J Psychol Interdisc Appl 82(2):277–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Pfaff L, Cinelli M (2016) The effects of a human confederate and goal location on the path selection of young adults. J Vis 16:1365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Savelsbergh GJP, Whiting HTA, Burden AM, Bartlett RM (1992) The role of predictive visual temporal information in the coordination of muscle activity in catching. Exp Brain Res 89:223–228.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00229019 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Sommer R (1959) Studies in personal space. Sociometry 22:247–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Templer JA (1992) Human territoriality and space needs on stairs. Staircase stud hazards, falls, safer design. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 61–70Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Kinesiology and Physical EducationWilfrid Laurier UniversityWaterlooCanada

Personalised recommendations