ArticleJournal of the Royal Society, Interface2020
Crowds in front of bottlenecks at entrances from the perspective of physics and social psychology.
Article in Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pedestrian Trajectory Dataset of Public European Squares.Scientific data · 2026Article
- Behavioural repertoires in moving crowds: an observational approach.Royal Society open science · 2025Article
- Dimensionless numbers reveal distinct regimes in the structure and dynamics of pedestrian crowds.PNAS nexus · 2024Article
- Parameter estimation from aggregate observations: a Wasserstein distance-based sequential Monte Carlo sampler.Royal Society open science · 2023Article
- Waiting and walking with strangers: a socio-psychological pedestrian experiment on joint action in anonymous situations.Royal Society open science · 2023Article
- Social aspects of collision avoidance: a detailed analysis of two-person groups and individual pedestrians.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Don't stop me now: Psychological effects of interrupting a moving pedestrian crowd and a video game.PloS one · 2023Article
- How people with disabilities influence crowd dynamics of pedestrian movement through bottlenecks.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- An attempt to distinguish physical and socio-psychological influences on pedestrian bottleneck.Royal Society open science · 2022Article
- A Hybrid Deep Learning and Visualization Framework for Pushing Behavior Detection in Pedestrian Dynamics.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Pedestrian flow characteristics through different angled bends: Exploring the spatial variation of velocity.PloS one · 2022Article
- A Hybrid Tracking System of Full-Body Motion Inside Crowds.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Systematic experimental investigation of the obstacle effect during non-competitive and extremely competitive evacuations.Scientific reports · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article presents an interdisciplinary study of physical and social psychological effects on crowd dynamics based on a series of bottleneck experiments. Bottlenecks are of particular interest for applications such as crowd management and design of emergency routes because they limit the performance of a facility. In addition to previous work on the dynamics within the bottleneck, this study focuses on the dynamics in front of the bottleneck, more specifically, at entrances. The experimental set-up simulates an entrance scenario to a concert consisting of an entrance gate (serving as bottleneck) and a corridor formed by barriers. The parameters examined are the corridor width, degree of motivation and priming of the social norm of queuing. The analysis is based on head trajectories and questionnaires. We show that the density of persons per square metre depends on motivation and also increases continuously with increasing corridor width, meaning that a density reduction can be achieved by a reduction of space. In comparison to other corridor widths observed, the narrowest corridor is rated as being fairer, more comfortable and as showing less unfair behaviour. Pushing behaviour is seen as ambivalent: it is rated as unfair
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.