Stop traffic with your smile!

Post by Dr. Jemima Stockton

Stop. Look. Listen…Say cheese! Recent research has shown that a smile can slow down and even stop traffic.

Since the 1970s, basic skills for staying alive as a pedestrian have been drilled into generations of British school children. Hot on the heels of Tufty Fluffytail – a pioneering red squirrel born in 1953 whose road safety club boasted a membership of over two million in the early seventies – the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents produced the Green Cross Code. The code is a set of very simple and very sensible instructions on how to cross streets safely. Number 3: use your eyes and ears to look and listen for traffic…Number 4: wait for the traffic to pass…

Untitled

Ken Langstaff © RoSPA circa 1960

But why wait for traffic when it can wait for you? Indeed, the new study suggests the code needs updating. Number 3 should include using your mouth to smile at oncoming motorists, making them stop and thereby eliminating the need for Number 4 (and 5 and 6).

The research was conducted by a team of social psychologists led by Nicolas Guéguen at the University of Southern Brittany in France. In Europe a quarter of all road traffic-related pedestrian fatalities occur at crossings; in urban areas of France the proportion rises to half. Previous research has shown that people who smile are regarded as more attractive and more intelligent, and generally perceived more favourably with regard to a range of attributes than non-smilers. Also, several studies suggest that being smiled at – the target of a smile – induces a better mood leading to acts of kindness, such as leaving a big tip for a waitress. Stopping at a pedestrian crossing cannot really be considered an act of kindness – even in France where 60% of motorists do not – since it is the law. Nevertheless, and in the face of shocking pedestrian fatality statistics, Guéguen and his team were interested in the influence of smiling on driver behaviour. They were spurred on by their earlier experiments, showing that more drivers stopped for a pedestrian at a crossing when the pedestrian stared at the oncoming motorist than when they did not look at them. Non-verbal communication between pedestrian and motorist evidently had a good effect on driver behaviour. If a blank stare could elicit better road “manners”, harnessing the mood-lifting power of smile could be a game-changer.

To test the effect of smiling on driver behaviour, Guéguen et al conducted three experiments, employing undergraduate students as research assistants to unleash their smiles on unwitting motorists. All tests were conducted during daylight hours on sunny days in urban areas in the west coast region of France. Experiment Number One was on zebra crossings. The research assistant waited at a zebra crossing and delivered either a smile or a neutral facial expression to the oncoming motorist. He (or she) recorded the driver’s sex and whether or not the motorist stopped and let him (or her) cross the road. Overall, drivers were significantly more likely to allow a crossing when smiled at by the research assistant than when faced with a blank stare: almost two thirds stopped for a smile but only half stopped for a stare. The sex of the research assistant and the sex of the driver also affected the likelihood the driver would stop (female drivers were more likely to stop; female pedestrians were more likely to be stopped for; and male drivers were more likely to stop for female than male pedestrians) but didn’t impact on the effect of a smile on the driver’s stopping behaviour.

In a nutshell, Experiment Number One suggests you’ll probably get across the road sooner at a zebra crossing by smiling at an oncoming motorist than by staring. But what if you want to cross elsewhere? What if, like most pedestrians, you want the most direct route to your destination, which does not include that zebra up the road? Any driver stopping to let you cross at an undesignated point would be doing so out of compassion rather than legal obligation. Roll on Experiment Number Two: does smiling induce kind behaviour? This was like Number One but conducted at points on the road that were not designated crossings. The research assistant stood on the kerb and put one foot into the road, signalling intent to cross. Unsurprisingly, fewer drivers stopped and let the research assistants cross the road than at the marked crossings in the first experiment. But, again, smiling increased the research assistants’ chances of getting across.

While Experiment Number Two provided evidence that smiling elicited “kind” behaviour, it didn’t explain how. Were the motorists stopping for smilers because they found them more attractive (and therefore more worthy of reaching the other side of the road)? Or did the kindness stem from a smile-induced good mood? The researchers designed their final experiment, Number Three, to find out. A female research assistant was deployed to wait at a zebra crossing on a road with a speed limit of 30 kilometres per hour (20mph). She stood there until a car stopped and then crossed, glancing at the motorist with either a smile or a neutral expression. The subsequent speed of the motorist, over the next 200 or so metres along the road, was calculated by another researcher. All 86 drivers who stopped broke the speed limit (men and women, with equal abandon) on the stretch of road immediately after the crossing. However, motorists who had been treated to a smile by the research assistant did so significantly – albeit slightly – less blatantly than those she blanked: average speeds following a smile and a neutral expression were 42.5 and 46.1 kilometres per hour (26.6mph and 28.8mph), respectively. This finding supports the idea that a smile induces a good mood because kindness is seen, in the form of a lower speed, after “smile exposure”.

So, in summary, you don’t have to be a flashing green man to calm traffic; you just need to flaunt your pearly whites.

Advertisements

STREET MOBILITY UPDATE: MORE OUTPUTS

During January, the Street Mobility team presented some updated results from the project at national and international conferences and national meetings.

Street Mobility @ UTSG 2016, Bristol

In the first week of January four Street Mobility team members presented their work at the 48th Annual Universities’ Transport Study Group (UTSG) conference in Bristol.

Bristol

Clifton Suspension Bridge, Bristol. Source: Harshil Shah (CC BY-ND 2.0)

Jemima Stockton presented our work developing a simple tool to measure individuals’ perceptions of their own and local busy roads at the. She also examined the various measures we have devised of community severance and looked at how these vary by how far away people live from the busiest road in their area. She also looked at whether it is associated with people’s well-being. The abstract of Jemima’s presentation can be found here.

Paulo Anciaes presented the results of a stated preference survey in our Finchley Road case study area to understand how long people are willing to walk to use the type of pedestrian crossing facility they prefer (or to avoid the type of crossing they dislike). The abstract is also online.

Ashley Dhanani presented his work developing a walkability model for London. His analysis found significant relationships between pedestrian density and components of walkability such as transport accessibility, street network configuration, land-use diversity and residential density.

In the same conference, Jemima also presented the main results of her PhD thesis, which developed a walkability model for London and its association with the amount and frequency of walking.

Finally, Shaun Scholes presented his work estimating changes in third-party fatality risk by sex, age, and travel mode in road accidents in the period 2005-2010.

Street Mobility @ TRB 2016, Washington

The following week, Jenny Mindell and Paulo Anciaes went to Washington for the annual Transportation Research Board (TRB) conference where they presented two papers related to the Street Mobility project.

Washington

Washington Monument. Source: Bill Couch (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0)

Jenny Mindell presented the work developing a pen-and-paper self-completion questionnaire to assess the impact of community severance on health and wellbeing. This has been designed so that it can be used by local communities, by local government, or by health or transport researchers to assess the extent (if any) of problems caused by busy roads.

In the same conference, Paulo Anciaes presented a paper simulating the effects of two types of intervention to reduce barriers to walking: changing the layout of the street network (by increasing the density and connectivity of the links available to pedestrians) and redesigning a busy road (by adding crossing facilities, reducing speed limit, or reallocating road space to pedestrians). The analysis focused on our Woodberry Down case study area.