Recollection of flame height and smoke volume in domestic fires

When a domestic fire occurs, how well do people perceive and recall the fire hazards they encounter? Although much research has been conducted on threat or risk perception and memory for threatening stimuli, to the authors' knowledge no studies have systematically tested how well people perceive and recall the threat stimulus in a fire context. This is an important topic given that domestic fires are usually the main source of fire-related injuries and deaths, and human behaviour is believed to play a significant role in such outcomes. Moreover, eyewitness testimonies play a significant role in subsequent fire, insurance and coroner investigations. The current study – part of wider research on human behaviour in domestic fires, called LIFEBID – sought to address the gap in knowledge by conducting an online experiment testing participants' (a) memories for the size of the flames and smoke witnessed in a mock kitchen fire, and (b) reported willingness to engage with the fire hazards. Participants' behaviours and attitudes in relation to other risky activities and control over events were also measured. The results revealed that accurate recollections of flame height and smoke volume can be obtained from members of the public, in certain cases. Accuracy was negatively impacted when the flames and smoke witnessed were larger in size. The size of the fire hazards also had an impact on participants' willingness to engage with the hazards, moderating the number who stated that they could have successfully extinguished the flames or would have entered the room with the smoke. Although there were signs that many participants recognised the risks posed by the larger hazards, a not inconsiderable number were still willing to engage with them. Being someone who takes greater risks in a health/safety domain and believing in one's ability to control what happens to oneself did not explain this finding. There is a clear need for a deeper investigation into people’s perceptions of fire hazards in a domestic fire context and their associated behaviours and fire outcomes.

[1]  E. Weber,et al.  A Domain-Specific Risk-Taking (DOSPERT) Scale for Adult Populations , 2006, Judgment and Decision Making.

[2]  Edwin R. Galea,et al.  Modelling occupant interaction with fire conditions using the buildingEXODUS evacuation model , 2001 .

[3]  P. Allison,et al.  Factors associated with distress in urban residential fire survivors. , 2002, Journal of Nursing Scholarship.

[4]  M. A. Safer,et al.  Tunnel memory for traumatic events , 1998 .

[5]  K. Lollar The Liminal Experience: Loss of Extended Self After the Fire , 2010 .

[6]  Carl Bonander,et al.  Differences in Determinants Amongst Individuals Reporting Residential Fires in Sweden: Results from a Cross-Sectional Study , 2015 .

[7]  K. Harber,et al.  Psychosocial resources, threat, and the perception of distance and height: support for the resources and perception model. , 2011, Emotion.

[8]  J. Rotter Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. , 1966, Psychological monographs.

[9]  Edwin R. Galea,et al.  From data to difference – considering the application of a large-scale database of human behaviour in accidental dwelling fires , 2015 .

[10]  M. Moffatt,et al.  House fire injury prevention update. Part I. A review of risk factors for fatal and non-fatal house fire injury , 1999, Injury prevention : journal of the International Society for Child and Adolescent Injury Prevention.

[11]  H. M. Jenkins,et al.  Psychological Monographs: General and Applied Learning and Memorization of Classifications1 , 2011 .