Understanding residents’ safety perceptions: the role of traffic flow, infrastructure, and socio-demographics
F. Kasubi, O. Mdimi, H.
Shita, S. Kasomi, A. Kinero, N. Novat, B. Kutela
Pages: 115-130
Abstract:
Improving roadway safety has been among
the focus of various researchers for a long time. Various initiatives have
been implemented based on the research findings to improve roadway safety.
However, studies that link traffic and transportation infrastructure
conditions to roadway safety considering users’ perspectives, are relatively
scarce despite the importance of users’ involvement. This study fills that
gap by analyzing community survey data from Austin, Texas, collected in 2018
and 2019. The ordered logistic model was used to analyze responses, where
respondents needed to rank their satisfaction levels from strongly agree to
strongly disagree with the question “I feel safe traveling with other drivers
on the road.” Results indicated that residents with high satisfaction with
the traffic flow on major and minor roadways, signal timing, street
conditions, lighting conditions, and sidewalk maintenance are more likely to
feel safe sharing the road with other drivers. Further, demographically,
Hispanics and Asian Americans are statistically significantly more likely to
feel safe than Caucasians. High-income people ($150K or more) and male
residents are more likely to feel safe, while as people live in the city for
a long time, they become less likely to feel safer traveling with other
drivers. Conversely, residents’ age and presence of bike lanes and trails did
not reveal a strong association with the resident’s safety perception. These
findings offer valuable, empirically grounded insights for policymakers and
urban planners, providing clear priorities for transport projects that
enhance both safety perceptions and the operational effectiveness of
infrastructure.
Keywords: safety perceptions; survey data
analysis; ordered logistic regression
2025 ISSUES
2024 ISSUES
LXII - April 2024LXIII - July 2024LXIV - November 2024Special 2024 Vol1Special 2024 Vol2Special 2024 Vol3Special 2024 Vol4
2023 ISSUES
LIX - April 2023LX - July 2023LXI - November 2023Special Issue 2023 Vol1Special Issue 2023 Vol2Special Issue 2023 Vol3
2022 ISSUES
LVI - April 2022LVII - July 2022LVIII - November 2022Special Issue 2022 Vol1Special Issue 2022 Vol2Special Issue 2022 Vol3Special Issue 2022 Vol4
2021 ISSUES
LIII - April 2021LIV - July 2021LV - November 2021Special Issue 2021 Vol1Special Issue 2021 Vol2Special Issue 2021 Vol3
2020 ISSUES
2019 ISSUES
Special Issue 2019 Vol1Special Issue 2019 Vol2Special Issue 2019 Vol3XLIX - November 2019XLVII - April 2019XLVIII - July 2019
2018 ISSUES
Special Issue 2018 Vol1Special Issue 2018 Vol2Special Issue 2018 Vol3XLIV - April 2018XLV - July 2018XLVI - November 2018
2017 ISSUES
Special Issue 2017 Vol1Special Issue 2017 Vol2Special Issue 2017 Vol3XLI - April 2017XLII - July 2017XLIII - November 2017
2016 ISSUES
Special Issue 2016 Vol1Special Issue 2016 Vol2Special Issue 2016 Vol3XL - November 2016XXXIX - July 2016XXXVIII - April 2016
2015 ISSUES
Special Issue 2015 Vol1Special Issue 2015 Vol2XXXV - April 2015XXXVI - July 2015XXXVII - November 2015
2014 ISSUES
Special Issue 2014 Vol1Special Issue 2014 Vol2Special Issue 2014 Vol3XXXII - April 2014XXXIII - July 2014XXXIV - November 2014
2013 ISSUES
2012 ISSUES
2011 ISSUES
2010 ISSUES
2009 ISSUES
2008 ISSUES
2007 ISSUES
2006 ISSUES
2005 ISSUES
2004 ISSUES
2003 ISSUES
