Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Predicting Human Behavior During Fires

  • Published:
Fire Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Evacuation models, including engineering hand calculations and computational tools, are used to calculate the time it takes to evacuate a building, which can then be used in an engineering safety analysis. However, there is a lack of available data and theory on occupant behavior for use by evacuation models to estimate evacuation time results and their uncertainty. In lieu of data and theory, evacuation models (and users) make assumptions and simplifications about occupant behavior, which can inappropriately characterize the time it actually takes to evacuate a building. The purpose of this paper is to reevaluate current egress modeling techniques and advocate for the inclusion of a robust, comprehensive, and validated conceptual model of occupant behavior during building fires. This paper begins by describing the current state of evacuation modeling of human behavior in fires and identifying gaps in current behavioral prediction techniques. The second part of the paper outlines a model of occupant decision-making during emergencies, referred to as the protective action decision model (PADM); a theory that can serve as the basis for the development of a conceptual model of occupant decision-making and behavior during the pre-evacuation period of building fires. The PADM provides a framework that describes the decision-making steps that influence protective actions taken in response to natural and technological disasters—including perceiving information, paying attention to the information, comprehending the information, establishing the nature of the threat, personalizing the risk, searching for potential protective actions and choosing one of these, and then performing that action. The paper ends with a discussion of how to adapt and expand the PADM in order to develop a predictive conceptual model of the pre-evacuation period for use by computer evacuation models.

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

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. A hypothetical example of this is the following: once individuals experience a certain number of cues that contain specific characteristics (e.g., smoke obscuration reaches a certain level), occupants perceive a level of risk, which would then influence them to take protective action. The type of occupant, for example, their social role in the building, may then dictate what type of protective action they select.

  2. This definition of pre-evacuation time is for this analysis only. Other research on pre-evacuation time, often referred to as pre-movement, delay, or pre-response time, may define the boundaries of this time period differently.

  3. The author acknowledges that there are individuals who are more vulnerable than others to incapacitation and death when exposed to toxic smoke products.

  4. One possible exception is in mass crowd events in which all occupants are densely located in the same area and are affected by the fire in the same way. In such cases, they are likely to respond in similar ways to the fire cues presented; however, panic is rarely seen even in these events.

  5. For various types of buildings, credible sources must be defined. One option is to define credibility by social roles, such as members of the fire safety team or floor wardens.

References

  1. Karter MJ Jr (2010) Fire loss in the United States during 2009. national fire protection association report. National Fire Protection Association, Quincy

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hall JR (2004) How many people can be saved from home fires if given more time to escape? Fire Technol 40(2):117–126

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kuligowski ED, Peacock RD, Hoskins BL (2010) A review of building evacuation models, 2nd edn. NIST Technical Note 1680, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg

    Google Scholar 

  4. Santos G, Aguirre BE (2005) Critical review of emergency evacuation simulation models. In: RD Peacock, ED Kuligowski (eds) Workshop on building occupant movement during fire emergencies. National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, pp 27–52

  5. Gilbert N (2008) Agent-based models. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kuligowski ED (2011) Terror defeated: occupant sensemaking, decision-making and protective action in the 2001 World Trade Center disaster. Ph.D. Dissertation. University of Colorado at Boulder, Boulder

  7. Galea, ER, Hulse L, Day R, Siddiqui A, Sharp G (2009) The UK WTC 9/11 evacuation study: an overview of the methodologies employed and some analysis relating to fatigue, stair travel speeds and occupant response times. In: The proceedings of the 4th international symposium on human behaviour in fire. Interscience Communications Ltd, London, UK, pp 27–40

  8. 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 3-315–3-341

  9. Canter D, Breaux J, Sime J (1980) Domestic, multiple occupancy and hospital fires. In: Canter D (ed) Fires and human behaviour. Wiley, New York, pp 117–136

    Google Scholar 

  10. 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 

  11. 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 

  12. Watson JB (1913) Psychology as the behaviorist views it. Psychol Rev 20:158–177

    Google Scholar 

  13. Proulx G, Laroche C (2003) Recollection, identification and perceived urgency of the temporal-three evacuation signal. J Fire Prot Eng 13(1):67–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  15. Merton RK (1968) Social theory and social structure. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  16. Parsons T (1951) The social system. The Free Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  17. Blumer H (1969) Symbolic interactionism: perspective and method. University of California Press, Berkley

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  19. Mileti DS, Beck EM (1975) Communication in crisis: explaining evacuation symbolically. Commun Res 2(1):24–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Feinberg WE, Johnson NR (1995) Firescap: a computer simulation model of reaction to a fire alarm. J Math Soc 20:247–269

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Edelman P, Herz E, Bickman L (1980) A model of behaviour in fires applied to a nursing home fire. In: Canter D (ed) Fires and human behaviour. Wiley, New York, pp 181–203

    Google Scholar 

  23. Breaux J, Canter D, Sime JD (1976) Psychological aspects of behaviour of people in fire situations. In: International fire protection seminar, 5th. Karlsruhe, pp 39–50

  24. Turner RH, Killian LM (1987) Collective behavior. Prentice Hall, Inc, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  25. 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 

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

    Google Scholar 

  27. Turner RH, Killian LM (1972) Collective behavior. Prentice Hall, Inc, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  28. 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

    Google Scholar 

  29. Turner RH, Killian LM (1957) Collective behavior. Prentice Hall, Inc, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  30. 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 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Book  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  36. Turner JC (1991) Social influence. Brooks/Cole, Pacific Grove

    Google Scholar 

  37. McGuire WJ (1985) The nature of attitudes and attitude change. In: Lindzey G, Arsonson F (eds) Handbook of social psychology. Random House, New York, pp 233–256

    Google Scholar 

  38. Hovland CI, Janis IL, Kelley HH (1953) Communication and Persuasion: psychological studies in opinion change. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  43. Kunreuther H (2002) Risk analysis and risk management in an uncertain world. Risk Anal 22(4):655–664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Lichtenstein S, Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Layman M, Combs B (1978) Judged frequency of lethal events. J Exp Psychol Hum Learn Mem 4:551–578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Kunreuther H, Meyer R, Zeckhauser R, Slovic P, Schwartz B, Schade C, Luce MF, Lippman S, Krantz D, Kahn B, Hogarth R (2002) High stakes decision making: normative, descriptive and prescriptive considerations. Market Lett 13(3):259–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Zakay D (1993) The impact of time perception processes on decision making under time stress. In: Svenson O, John Maule A (eds) Stress in human judgment, decision making. Plenum Press, New York, pp 59–72

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Simon HA (1956) Rational choice and the structure of environments. Psychol Rev 63:129–138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Thompson CM, Forester JA, Cooper SE, Bley DC, Wreathall J (1997) In: Proceedings of the IEEE sixth annual human factors meeting, pp 9-13–9-17

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  59. Groner N (2009) A situation awareness analysis for the use of elevators during fire emergencies. In: 4th international symposium on human behavior in fire: conference proceedings. Interscience Communications, London, UK, pp 61–72

  60. Sekizawa A (2004) Human factors in fire safety measures. Fire Sci Technol 23(4):296–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. 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

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

    Google Scholar 

  63. 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. Interscience Communications Ltd, London, pp 713–724

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Sime J (1984) Escape behaviour in fire: ‘panic’ or affiliation? Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Psychology, University of Surrey

  66. Mileti DS, Bandy R, Bourque LB, Johnson A, Kano M, Peek L, Sutton J, Wood M (2006) Annotated bibliography for public risk communication on warnings for public protective actions response and public education. http://www.colorado.edu/hazards/publications/informer/infrmr2/pubhazbibann.pdf

  67. Galea ER, Shields J, Canter D, Boyce K, Day R, Hulse L, Siddiqui A, Summerfield L, Marselle M, Greenall P (2006) Methodologies employed in the collection, retrieval and storage of human factors information derived from first hand accounts of survivors of the WTC disaster of 11 September 2001. J Appl Fire Sci 15(4):253–276 (published in Nov 2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Proulx G, Irene MA, Reid NRC (2004) Human behavior study, cook county administration building fire, October 17, 2003—Chicago, IL. National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa

    Google Scholar 

  69. Fahy RF, Proulx G (2001) Toward creating a database on delay times to start evacuation and walking speeds for use in evacuation modeling. In: 2nd international symposium on human behaviour in fire. Interscience Communications Ltd, London, pp 175–183

  70. Brennan P (1997) Timing response in real fires. In: Hasemi Y (ed) Fire safety science—proceedings of the fifth international symposium. Interscience Communications Ltd, London, pp 807–818

    Google Scholar 

  71. Purser DA, Kuipers ME (2004) Interactions between buildings, fires and occupant behavior using a relational database created from incident investigations and interviews. In: Human behaviour in fire: proceedings of the third international symposium. Interscience Communications Ltd, London, pp 443–456

  72. Gwynne S, Galea ER, Parke J, Hickson J (2003) The collection and analysis of pre-evacuation times from evacuation trials and their application to evacuation modeling. Fire Technol 39(2):173–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  73. Shields TJ, Boyce KE (2000) A study of evacuation from large retail stores. Fire Saf J 35(1):25–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Purser DA (1998) Quantification of behavior for engineering design standards and escape time calculations. In: Human behaviour in fire: proceedings of the first international symposium. Interscience Communications Ltd, London, pp 497–506

  75. Kuligowski ED, Mileti DS (2009) Modeling pre-evacuation delay by occupants in world trade center towers 1 and 2 on September 11, 2001. Fire Saf J 44(4):487–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  76. 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

  77. Sorensen JH (1991) When shall we leave? factors affecting the timing of evacuation departures. Int J Mass Emerg Disast 9(2):153–165

    Google Scholar 

  78. Galea ER, Deere S, Sharp G, Filippidis L, Hulse L (2010) Investigating the impact of culture on evacuation behaviour. In: The proceedings of the 12th international fire science and engineering conference, Interflam 2010. Interscience Communications Ltd, London, pp 879–892

Download references

Acknowledgements

My appreciation to Liam Downey, William Grosshandler, Dennis Mileti, Ross Corotis, and especially to Kathleen Tierney, chair of my dissertation committee, for providing detailed and insightful comments and suggestions on the development of my research project and dissertation. Thank you also to Anthony Hamins, Steve Gwynne, Jason Averill, and Richard Peacock. Finally, the author gratefully acknowledges the UK WTC project HEED, funded by the UK EPSRC (grant EP/D507790/1) for providing access to the HEED database, which was used to develop the conceptual model discussed briefly in the Discussion section of this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

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

    Erica Kuligowski

Authors
  1. Erica Kuligowski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Erica Kuligowski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kuligowski, E. Predicting Human Behavior During Fires. Fire Technol 49, 101–120 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-011-0245-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10694-011-0245-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation