Cognitive Biases Within Decision Making During Fire Evacuations

During a fire evacuation, once an individual perceives cues from a fire event, they must interpret them to assess the new situation and determine whether action is required. It is proposed that this assessment and action selection can employ either an automatic or reflective processing system depending on the nature of the situation and the experiences of the individual involved. This decision-making process is bounded in terms of the information available, the time available, and an individual’s resources to process such information that influences which processing mechanism is adopted. To compensate for such limitations and manage the uncertainty and complexity associated with the decision-making process, people may employ heuristics that reduce decision-making from a cognitively effortful problem-solving task requiring mental reflection, to a less effortful pattern-matching process, where stored conditions and expectations are quickly scanned to identify relevant responses. During this decision-making process cognitive biases may occur which cause an individual to neglect or be biased towards certain information: this may potentially lead to an inappropriate and/or unexpected response. Cognitive biases affect performance without the individual being directly aware of them. This paper identifies cognitive biases from existing literature that may influence a person’s decision-making process during a fire evacuation, along with how these align with general decision-making in the process. The purpose of the article is to promote consideration of cognitive biases in the modeling of evacuee behavior, as well as during the fire safety design of buildings and evacuation procedures.

[1]  Gary Klein,et al.  Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions , 2017 .

[2]  D. Kahneman Thinking, Fast and Slow , 2011 .

[3]  S. A. Ames,et al.  The Manchester Woolworth's store fire, May 1979: Burning characteristics of the furniture , 1980 .

[4]  Carey K. Morewedge,et al.  Social defaults : Observed choices become choice defaults , 2014 .

[5]  Enrico Ronchi,et al.  A model of the decision-making process during pre-evacuation , 2015 .

[6]  Wendy Saunders,et al.  Occupant Decision Making In Office Building Fire Emergencies: Experimental Results , 1997 .

[7]  Suzanne C. Thompson,et al.  Illusions of Control , 1999, Cognitive Illusions.

[8]  Daniel Nilsson,et al.  Exit choice in fire emergencies - Influencing choice of exit with flashing lights , 2009 .

[9]  B. Latané,et al.  The Unresponsive Bystander: Why Doesn't He Help? , 1972 .

[10]  Marie Helweg-Larsen,et al.  Do Moderators of the Optimistic Bias Affect Personal or Target Risk Estimates? A Review of the Literature , 2001 .

[11]  A. Tversky,et al.  Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases , 1974, Science.

[12]  J. Baron Thinking and deciding, 2nd ed. , 1994 .

[13]  Michael Kinsey,et al.  Guidance for the Model Developer on Representing Human Behavior in Egress Models , 2015, Fire Technology.

[14]  T. Drabek Human System Responses to Disaster: An Inventory of Sociological Findings , 2011 .

[15]  Michael Kinsey,et al.  HUMAN BEHAVIOR IN FIRE MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION | NIST , 2015 .

[16]  All Nrc,et al.  Why Building Occupants Ignore Fire Alarms , 2008 .

[17]  Norbert Schwarz,et al.  Integrating Temporal Biases , 2004, Psychological science.

[18]  Ron Sun,et al.  Duality of the Mind , 2002 .

[19]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Conditions for intuitive expertise: a failure to disagree. , 2009, The American psychologist.

[20]  D. Fennell INVESTIGATION INTO THE KING'S CROSS UNDERGROUND FIRE , 1988 .

[21]  David Hardman,et al.  Judgment and Decision Making: Psychological Perspectives , 2009 .

[22]  Enrico Ronchi,et al.  An Evacuation Decision Model based on perceived risk, social influence and behavioural uncertainty , 2016, Simul. Model. Pract. Theory.

[23]  Ruggiero Lovreglio,et al.  A study of herding behaviour in exit choice during emergencies based on random utility theory. , 2016 .

[24]  Michael Jon. Kinsey,et al.  Vertical transport evacuation modelling , 2011 .

[25]  Paul A. Reneke Evacuation Decision Model , 2013 .

[26]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Would You Be Happier If You Were Richer? A Focusing Illusion , 2006, Science.

[27]  David V. Canter,et al.  The decision to evacuate: a study of the motivations which contribute to evacuation in the event of fire , 1985 .

[28]  Norman Köhring,et al.  Cognitive bias cheat sheet , 2016 .

[29]  P. Dolan,et al.  MINDSPACE: influencing behaviour for public policy , 2010 .

[30]  Michael K. Lindell,et al.  Facing the Unexpected: Disaster Preparedness and Response in the United States , 2013 .

[31]  J. Stroop Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. , 1992 .

[32]  E. Kuligowski Terror Defeated: Occupant Sensemaking, Decision-Making and Protective Action in the 2001 World Trade Center Disaster , 2011 .

[33]  John T. Cacioppo,et al.  The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion , 1986, Advances in Experimental Social Psychology.

[34]  Paul Rozin,et al.  Unit Bias , 2006, Psychological science.

[35]  F. Strack,et al.  Ease of retrieval as information: Another look at the availability heuristic. , 1991 .

[36]  J. J. Gibson The theory of affordances , 1977 .

[37]  Jonathan Evans,et al.  Science Perspectives on Psychological , 2022 .

[38]  Gary Klein,et al.  Rapid Decision Making on the Fire Ground: The Original Study Plus a Postscript , 2010 .

[39]  David V. Canter,et al.  Fires and human behaviour , 1980 .