ACTION RESEARCH ON EVACUATION METHOD IN EMERGENT SITUATION (II)

DOI Web Site Web Site 4 Citations

Bibliographic Information

Other Title
  • 緊急避難状況における避難誘導方法に関するアクション・リサーチ (II)
  • キンキュウ ヒナン ジョウキョウ ニ オケル ヒナン ユウドウ ホウホウ ニ
  • EFFECTS OF LEADER: EVACUEE RATIO ON EFFICIENCY OF FOLLOW-DIRECTION METHOD AND FOLLOW-ME METHOD
  • 誘導者と避難者の人数比が指差誘導法と吸着誘導法に及ぼす効果

Search this article

Description

Two evacuation methods in emergent situation were compared in a field experiment. One was a traditional method, named “Follow-direction method”, in which each leader indicated an exit for evacuees with loud voice and large gesture, while moving himself toward the exit. The other was a new method, named “Follow-me method”, in which each leader acted one on evacuee to follow him and actually proceeded to the exit without calling out to many evacuees nor indicating the direction of the exit.<BR>The experiment focused on effects of a leader: evacuee ratio on the efficiency of these two methods. Both leaders and evacuees were university students, but leaders had been trained in their assigned method. Five conditions were introduced; (1) four leaders using Follow-direction method, (2) four leaders using Follow-me method, (3) two leaders using Follow-direction method, (4) two leaders using Follow-me method, and (5) two leaders, one using Follow-direction method and the other using Follow-me method. The number of evacuees was sixteen, fourteen males and two females, in each condition. At the beginning of evacuation, two exits were opened. One was close to and visible for evacuees, and the other was invisible from initial evacuee positions. Each leader, however, evacuated through the latter exit.<BR>Leader: evacuee ratio was found to determine the effectiveness of the Follow-me method. When leader: evacuee ratio was 1: 4 (four leader condition), the Follow-me method achieved more rapid evacuation than the Follow-direction method as in the study of Sugiman, Misumi, and Sako (1983). Contrary, when leader: evacuee ratio was 1: 8 (two leader condition), eleven evacuees left through the exit to which leaders did not lead in the two leader Follow-me method. It was only in the two leader Follow-me method that evacuees appeared who used a wrong exit. Furthermore, the two leader mixed method achieved more rapid evacuation than the two leader Follow-direction method. This was considered to provide a basis for using Followdirection and Follow-me methods jointly in real evacuation planning.

Journal

Citations (4)*help

See more

Keywords

Details 詳細情報について

Report a problem

Back to top