Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35706660›Full record

ArticleRoyal Society open science2022

An attempt to distinguish physical and socio-psychological influences on pedestrian bottleneck.

Jonas Rzezonka, Mohcine Chraibi, Armin Seyfried, Ben Hein, Andreas Schadschneider

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Royal Society open science, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Jonas RzezonkaInstitute for Advanced Simulation, Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Julich, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7178-3231
Mohcine ChraibiInstitute for Advanced Simulation, Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Julich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0999-6807
Armin SeyfriedInstitute for Advanced Simulation, Forschungszentrum Jülich GmbH, Julich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8888-0978
Ben HeinSchool of Architecture and Civil Engineering, University of Wuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany.
Andreas SchadschneiderInstitute for Theoretical Physics, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2054-7973

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

It has been realized that the distinction between social-psychological effects and physical effects in pedestrian crowds is complex, and so the relevance of social psychology for the properties of pedestrian streams is still discussed controversially. Although physics-based models appear to capture many properties rather accurately, it was argued that simple systems of self-driven particles could not explain certain emergent phenomena. In particular, results from a recent empirical study of pedestrian flow at bottlenecks have been interpreted as indicating the relevance of social psychology even in relatively simple scenarios of crowd dynamics. The study showed a surprising dependence of the density near the bottleneck on the width of the corridor leading to it. The density increased with increasing corridor width, although a wider corridor provides more space for pedestrians. It has been argued that this observation is a consequence of social norms, which trigger the effect by a preference for queuing in such situations. However, convincing evidence for this hypothesis is still missing. Here, we reconsider this scenario from a physics perspective using computer simulations of a simple microscopic velocity-based model.

Indexed as

bottleneckcrowdspedestrianphysicssimulationsocial psychology

Identifiers

PMID35706660
PMCPMC9156912

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.