NBSIR 78-1508

HUMAN RESPONSE TO FIRE:

THREE DESIGNS FOR RESEARCH

Fred I. Stahl

Environmental Design Research Division

Center for Building Technology

National Engineering Laboratory

National Bureau of Standards

Washington, D.C. 20234

March 20, 1978

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Juanita M. Kreps, Secretary

Dr. Sidney Harman, Under Secretary

Jordan J. Baruch, Assistant Secretary for Science and Technology

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS. Ernest Ambler, Director

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF FIGURES iii

PREFACE iv

ABSTRACT v

1 . INTRODUCTION . 1

1.1 OVERVIEW 1 1.2 PROBLEM 2 1.3 OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH 2

2. DESIGN ONE: AN EXPLORATORY PROCEDURE FOR STUDYING THE

TRANSFORMATION OF "EVERYDAY" ENVIRONMENTAL SETTINGS INTO

"EMERGENCY" SITUATIONS 3

2.1 ISSUES 3 2.2 METHODS AND PROCEDURE 4 2.2.1 Experience Survey 4 2.2.2 Comparative Case Analysis 4

2.2.3 Summary of Procedure 7 2.3 UTILITY OF THE DESIGN «. 7

3. DESIGN TWO: A FIELD- EXPERIMENT ON DIFFERENTIAL EMERGENCY

COGNITION 10

3.1 ISSUES 10

3.2 METHODS AND PROCEDURE 10

3.2.1 Instruments 11

3.2.2 Subjects and Field Sites 12

3.2.3 Procedure 12

3.3 UTILITY OF THE DESIGN 13

4. DESIGN THREE: A FIELD EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN FOR EVALUATING

EMERGENCY TRAINING PROGRAMS 18

4.1 ISSUES 18

4.1.1 Concepts and Operational Definitions, 18

4.2 METHODS AND PROCEDURE 19

4.2.1 Design 19

4.2.2 Selecting Research Sites 19

4.2.3 Subject Sample 20

4.2.4 Outline of Procedure 20

4.2.5 Data Analysis: A Brief Note 20

4.3 UTILITY OF THE DESIGN 21

5. SUMMARY 25

REFERENCES 26

ii
LIST OF FIGURES

Page

Figure 2.1 APPLICATION OF THE MULTIPLE TIME SERIES

RESEARCH DESIGN 9

Figure 3.1 FACTORIAL STRUCTURE OF Q-SORT STATEMENT CATEGORIES .. 14

Figure 3.2 SAMPLE Q-SORT STATEMENTS 13

Figure 3.3 FACTORIAL DESIGN FOR HYPOTHESIS (1) 16

Figure 3.4 FACTORIAL DESIGN FOR HYPOTHESIS (2) 17

Figure 4.1 (a) 2x3 FACTORIAL DESIGN 22

(b) EXPANSION OF THE POST- TEST ONLY CONTROL-GROUP

DESIGN 23

(c) DESIGN EXPANDED FURTHER TO INCLUDE

"RETROSPECTIVE-PRETEST" COVARIATE MEASURES 24

iii
PREFACE

The Environmental Design Research Division, Center for Building

Technology, NBS, is developing a more complete understanding of building access and egress under both emergency and "everyday" conditions.

The responses of building occupants during fire emergencies is an important part of this overall effort.

Many of the ideas presented in this report were formulated by

the author at the Environmental Psychology Program, The City University

of New York, during 1975 and 1976. These concepts were refined under

the CBT Building Access /Egress Research Planning Project, of which

the author is the project leader.

Several individuals provided assistance and guidance during the

development of research designs presented here, and during the preparation of this report. Dr. Gary Winkel and Dr. Susan Saegert of

the Environmental Psychology Program, City University of New York, are acknowledged for their substantive inputs to the research design

process. Dr. Edward Arens, Chief of the Architectural Research

Program, NBS, and Dr. Belinda Collins and Mr. Sanford Adler, both of

the Occupant Safety Program, NBS, are all gratefully acknowledged for

their editorial assistance.

iv
ABSTRACT

As a group, empirical investigators of the responses of building

occupants to emergencies employ idiosyncratic, non-repl icable techniques

for research design, data acquisition, and data analysis. As a result,

it has been difficult to explain the influence of many, often uncontrolled,

variables. This shortcoming has frequently rendered research findings

indeterminate and non-cumulative. This paper explores three exemplary

research design strategies, each aimed at mitigating these problems by

introducing a greater degree of rigor into the study of human behavior

in fires. Both exploratory and experimental designs are considered in

various problem contexts.

v
1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 OVERVIEW

Our ability to reduce the incidence of deaths and injuries due to building fires depends greatly upon our understanding of human response during

fire situations. This notion is widely accepted, and research interest

in human behavior in fires has increased during the 1970's. Several

reviews document this development (e.g., Rubin and Cohen, 1974, Pauls,

1975; Breaux et.al., 1976; Stahl and Archea, 1977). Reviews of the literature on occupant response to fires have identified three categories of

research effort: the development of explanatory models (e.g., Archea,

1977; Bickman, 1977; Stahl, 1976, 1977); the development of specific

techniques for gathering data (e.g., Pauls, 1975, 1977); and the description of actual fire events (e.g., Wood, 1972; Bickman, 1976; Haber, 1977;

Bryan, 1977; Lerup, 1977).

Three principal categories of explanatory models of occupant behavior

in fires have appeared, including: hypothetical models (Archea, 1977);

models derived from cognate psychological theory (Stahl, 1976, 1977);

and models derived from the analysis of specific case data (Breaux,

1977). These efforts remain largely speculative, however, and no model

of occupant behavior in fires is universally accepted.

At present, attempts to develop techniques for data-gathering have

focused either on the design of questionnaires, surveys and interview

schedules for use after real fires, or upon the development of direct

observational techniques which are more-or-less unobtrusive, and are

presumed to be accurate and reliable. Survey questionnaires designed

by Wood (1972) and Bryan (1977), interview formats developed by Canter

et. al. (1976), and videotape recording techniques applied by Pauls

(1975) during fire drills are chief examples. To date, however, these

techniques, strategies, and instruments have been neither adequately

nor independently validated or replicated.

Several investigators have attempted to analyze data from specific fire cases (Wood, 1972; Bryan, 1977; Haber, 1977). These efforts have been

primarily descriptive, but, because these studies identify salient variables for future examination, they may also be classified as heuristic.

Three observations can be made concerning the state-of-the-art of

research into occupant response during building fires: First, various

investigations provide piecemeal attempts to satisfy descriptive, methodological, or heuristic objectives. Second, rarely have individual

researchers even attempted to replicate or cross-validate published

results. Finally, the better-known and generally accepted techniques

for experimental design and data analysis seem not to have been applied

to studies of occupant response to fires.

1
1 . 2 PROBLEM

The remainder of our discussion proposes to rectify this last problem.

In particular, we shall be concerned with reducing the indeterminacy of

research findings which necessarily results whenever data are obtained

from poorly controlled situations. Why have these investigators made

so little use of rigorous methods of research design and data analysis?

The reasons include the likelihood that well-controlled laboratory

experimentation cannot replicate all the important aspects of real-life

fire conditions, and that as a result, the applicability of inferences

drawn from laboratory data may be sharply limited. Other reasons involve the belief that too little is currently known about occupants'

experiences in building fires, and that, consequently, any rigorous

analysis of specific variables or relationships would be premature.

Finally, no investigator wants to subject human occupants to any real

or perceived life threat, for research purposes.

1.3 OBJECTIVES AND APPROACH

Clearly, the shortcomings enumerated above represent real and important

concerns. This paper will provide examples of research designs that

could introduce much-needed rigor into the analysis of human response

to fires. Designs are considered that, in general, describe and demonstrate the applicability of such approaches as:

(1) systematic exploratory research (Selltiz, et.al., 1959), in

which hypotheses and procedures for testing them may arise,

ad hoc, as more becomes known about the phenomenon under

study; and

(2) field-experimental research (Cook and Campbell, 1976), in

which data from naturalistic settings must be viewed in

terms of sources of variance which may be difficult to either

identify or control, and in which the behaviors of people are viewed in terms of the experimental manipulation of such

settings

Three designs have been selected for discussion. These examples were chosen in order to provide a variety of both researchable problems,

and research strategies. The first problem concerns the question of

how "everyday" environmental behavior is transformed into highly

stressful "emergency" response. This problem will be considered

through systematic exploratory methods. In the second problem, the

study of emergency cognition across individual persons and situations

is addressed by means of a field-experimental design. Finally, a fieldexperimental design is presented for the purpose of investigating the

impact of training programs upon evacuation behavior, and upon safety

attitudes.

2
2. DESIGN ONE: AN EXPLORATORY PROCEDURE FOR STUDYING THE TRANSFORMATION

OF "EVERYDAY" ENVIRONMENTAL SETTINGS INTO "EMERGENCY" SITUATIONS

2.1 ISSUES

Consider, as an example, the problem of occupant responses to fire in an office building. The research objectives are to identify the variables and components of a complex environment-behavior system, and to

describe relationships among such components. The "system" at issue

concerns changes in physical settings and activity patterns, believed

to emerge with the onset of the fire event.

The researcher is likely to find relatively little literature which

treats the subject of building emergencies specifically. However,

several existing literatures are available which may provide an initial

focus, such as the sociological literature on natural disasters, and the

psychological literature on stressful environments. These are certainly

capable of providing useful points for departure, making it possible to

formulate tentative hypotheses for informal evaluation in the field.

Examples include hypotheses about the mobilization of groups during

various phases of the emergency period, and under a variety of conditions.

The work of sociologists Dynes and Quaranteili (1968) for example, on the

emergence of task groups during a small-town disaster, offers a basis for

such hypotheses.

Initial hypotheses will be crude at best. They can only be expected

to relate indirectly to the problem at issue, since they will have

been derived from dissimilar contexts (i.e. , it is not clear that the

social, physical and communicatory structures existing within an office

building make it treatable as a "community," in the same sense as we might treat a town or small city).

The specific objectives of the first design are to: (1) formulate the

problem for more precise, situation-specific investigation; (2) increase

researchers’, designers and policy-makers' familiarity with occupants'

responses during fires; and (3) elucidate concepts and theoretical

notions deriving either from various literatures, or from popular preconceptions. Selltiz et.al. (1959), have referred to these as the goals

of exploratory research. As a means for identifying the fundamental

variables of a system, and for observing the basic operation of ongoing

processes in natural settings, the exploratory approach serves as a precursor to the formulation of predictive models, and to more formal

research designs. To achieve these goals in the context of the current

problem, the design recommended here is composed of two segments: the

experience survey, and the comparative case analysis.

3
2.2 METHODS AND PROCEDURE

2.2.1 Experience Survey

Selltiz, et.al. » have suggested that the experience survey offers the

researcher an opportunity to gather preliminary information vital to the

design of case studies. Such surveys may serve to identify hypotheses

and crude yes-or-no propositions relevant to the context specifically

under study, and they may elucidate for the researcher any factors

potentially under his control. Moreover, the experience survey is

expected to assist in the identification of study sites, the selection

of participant observers, and in the elucidation of difficulties con- cerning the cooperation of various groups.

Such issues, as well as questions derived from the literature or other

a priori knowledge acquired by the investigator, shall be incorporated

into structured interview schedules. The interviews should present the

same questions to diverse respondents (to maximize the opportunity for

obtaining multiple viewpoints to the same issues), and should encourage

respondents to contribute "new” insights on the problem. Accordingly,

a structured listing of "open-ended" questions should be developed and

administered.

In selecting respondents for the survey, it is necessary to sample from

populations representing relevant diverse viewpoints, and having had

appropriate experiences. For the present office building problem, the

survey should sample from among groups of secretaries, other office

workers, executives, and building visitors, as well as from among

populations of management, maintenance, and fire-fighting personnel.

In the case of building occupants and users, the survey should include

both persons who have and who have not experienced a building fire

(in order to compare "how I behaved" with "how I think I would behave

if. . ." viewpoints). Similarly, management and maintenance respondents

should represent both those who have and those who have never been

required to deal with a building fire. The fire-fighter sample should

primarily include individuals who have had extensive experience with

office building emergencies (having, presumably, had many opportunities

to actually observe occupant behavior during such crises).

2.2.2 Comparative Case Analysis

After the experience survey has been completed and the content of the

interviews analyzed, specific study sites may be selected and a detailed

research strategy outlined. Although no such preliminary work has

actually been conducted in connection with the current problem, the

procedure suggested here may be taken as representative of the type of

investigatory processes anticipated.

Through this procedure, we wish to explain the dynamic process , wherein

a regularly occurring behavioral setting undergoes some form of change

4
temporarily, and then (presumably) recovers. In order to trace the

evolution of such a process, the case analysis method based on an expanded version of the multiple time series quasi-experimental design

(see Campbell and Stanley, 1963) is suggested. Time series observations are made on parallel systems which differ in terms of environmental manipulation or inherent system characteristics (refer to

Figure 2.1). This approach permits comparisons among groups which

differ in their level of emergency preparation. Such comparisons are expected to provide additional dimensions along which to describe human

response to emerging fire conditions, and to yield more complex and

realistic hypotheses for future investigation.

Site selection . As discussed above, the experience survey is expected

to contribute to the process of study-site selection. Inputs to this

process will include information about the availability of suitable

buildings, and the responsiveness of owners and other groups to the

objectives and practical demands of the study. To reduce overall variance in the measure of emerging response, moreover, study-sites should

be selected on the basis of their being matched on such criteria as:

(a) Architectural design concept (e.g., office tower with central elevator core), (b) Interior design concept (e.g., "landscaped" or other

open-office planning), (c) Typical floor area dimensions, (d) Mean

population, and (e) Emergency warning and evacuation facilities. An

appropriate number of sites so matched shall be selected for study.

Environmental manipulations. The reader has noted in FIGURE 2.1 that

two forms of environmental manipulation are utilized to permit a com- parative analysis of emergency response under differing conditions.

These are: (1) the conduct of emergency training programs, and (2) the

sudden interruption of on-going work tasks by unannounced evacuation

drills. Consider five study sites. Occupants of study site it 1, for

example, might experience a building-specific training program which

includes walk-through drills, lectures and demonstrations focusing

on the problems of life-safety in their own building. In site it 2,

occupants would also receive building-specific pre-emergency training.

In addition, trained "floor-captains" would be designated for studyfloors at this site. The training program at building it 3 would be

general in content, with occupants seeing films and hearing brief

lectures describing various (non-site-specific) issues in fire safety.

Sites it 4 and it 5 would receive no training programs.

On the appropriate occasions, sites it 1 through it 4 experience evacuation

drills. Site it 3 is a "control" case, since during the study period,

settings within this building are subjected to neither of the manipulations discussed. The site designations "it 1" through ’7/5" - and the

manipulations corresponding to each - should be randomly assigned to

the selected buildings.

Observations and measures. Data from independent sources may be collected, in an effort to reduce the uncertainty of interpretation

(Webb, et.al., 1966). Three possible sources are occupant attitude

5
surveys, unobtrusive observations of occupant behavior, and reports by

building management personnel.

Interview schedules designed to measure occupants' life-safety attitudes

may be administered to a different sample of occupants at each site,

in accordance with the research design (excluding the period associated

with evacuation drills). Respondents would include secretaries, executives, and visitors, and should be randomly selected from populations

occupying designated study-floors within the sites. Attitudes may be

tapped along three dimensions, including persons' expectations of their

own performance, expectations and beliefs about their buildings' "life

safety potential," and attitudes about working in high-rise office

buildings in general.

Unobtrusive observations of evacuation behavior could be conducted by

participant observers , stationed for this purpose. Randomly selected

individuals (secretaries and executives - not the same individuals as those interviewed above) could be observed and tracked by an observer

assigned to each, with this procedure occurring at each site. The same subjects will be observed during each occasion prescribed by the

research design. Participant observers could be co-workers of the

persons observed, and would be selected on the basis of physical,

social and task distance factors separating the two individuals, and

other opportunities for protecting the secrecy of the observers' purpose.

During observation periods, observers would rank subjects' movement

patterns, and note stimuli which seem to initiate changes in behavior,

apparent objectives of behavior, forms of activity involved, and qualities of behavior (e.g., intensity, unusualness, appropriateness, effectivity; from Selltiz et.al.). Observers will record data relating to

these variables on prepared rating forms, to the extent that doing so does not jeopardize their "cover." Such forms will be supplemented by

intensive debriefing sessions immediately following each observation

period. Observation periods may consist of one-hour sessions, randomly

sampled from workdays. In the case of the evacuation drill observation,

subjects will be tracked for a period of one hour, beginning with the

onset of the alarm signal. The foregoing discussion describes an ideal

research approach, and the ethical difficulties associated with

uninformed participation by subjects are recognized, and need to be

addressed.

Finally, the perceptions of building management and maintenance

personnel could be recorded through interview techniques. Schedules

must be designed to assess their opinions about circulation and movement

patterns through the building. The objective of pre-drill interviews

is the identification of perceptions about potential points of congestion,

crowding and blockage. Post-drill interviews should focus on the observance of particular trouble spots during evacuation drills, and the

building's general return to normalcy.

6
2.2.3 Summary of Procedure

The following outline briefly describes the sequences of recommended

research activities:

(1) Conduct experience survey; select study sites and participant

observers; identify any initial hypotheses that may be worth testing

in the field.

(2) Conduct "baseline" (pre-fire training) observations and attitude assessments. Data gathering techniques should be continually updated to reflect the need to field-test new hypotheses discovered during

this phase.

(3) Administer training programs to occupants of designated study

floors.

(4) Conduct post-training observations and interviews utilizing

updated techniques. Update again, to field test any additional hypotheses discovered in the field during this phase.

(5) At a randomly selected point in time, conduct evacuation drills

at each of the designated sites. For a period of time (say, one hour)

following the onset of the emergency alarm, conduct participant observations only and record data required. Update the observation technique,

as required.

(6) Measure post-drill behavioral and attitudinal variables

approximately two weeks following the drill, during randomly selected

periods at each site.

(7) Debrief all participants.

2.3 UTILITY OF THE DESIGN

Fires frequently occur during periods of normal building usage, and

consequently they present significant disruptions to occupants' daily

routines. In a very real sense, everyday environmental settings are transformed - often suddenly - into potentially life-threatening situations, during the course of a fire. At present, extremely little is

known about the mechanisms underlying such transformations, at the

individual building scale. Appropriate hypotheses seem difficult to

formulate, experience still must be gained in sampling and experimental

design, and even the selection of variables for study is not always

strai ght fo rward

Similar difficulties were confronted by researchers investigating human

responses to large scale natural disasters (floods, earthquakes). In

that domain, various techniques comprising exploratory, or holistic

7
methodology have proven useful in the identification of appropriate

variables, hypotheses, and methods for more detailed analysis. The

design presented above provides a means for applying the exploratory

approach at the building scale. The design is recommended with the

expectation that a well-laid framework will pave the way for the

conduct of more analytical, problem oriented studies.

8
GROUPS

Time Sequence of Experimental

Activities

°1 °1 °1 i X

l i °2 °2 °2

i X4°3 i °4 °4 °4

1 1

°1 °1 °1 i X

2 ! °2 °2 °2 i X 5°3 ! °4 °4 °4

1 1

°1 °1 °1

i X

3 i °2 °2 °2

! X

6

0

3 1 °4 °4 °4

1 -r r -1 1

°1 °1 °1 :°2 °2 °2 ! X 7°3 ! °4 °4 °4 — 1

1

11— o °1 °1 i :°2 °2 °2 ! ! °4 °4 °4

LEGEND: X^: building-specific pre-fire training program

: building-specific program, with trained "floor

X^: general (non site-specific) training program

X - X_: evacuation drills

4 7

0^: baseline observations and measures

0^: post- training observations and measures

0^ : evacuation-drill observations

0^: "recovery" observations and measures

Figure 2.1 Application of Campbell and Stanley's "Multiple

Series" Research Design

captains"

Time

9
3. DESIGN TWO: A FIELD- EXPERIMENT ON DIFFERENTIAL EMERGENCY COGNITION

3.1 ISSUES

Theoretical conceptualizations have begun to emerge suggesting the

existence of some relationship between "cognitive sets" held by

individual occupants, environmental and social context, and actions

actually taken during a fire situation (Breaux et.al., 1976; Stahl,

1977; Bickman, 1977). By cognitive set I mean the complex network of

attitudes and prior experiences through which humans are predisposed

to interpret, organize, and respond to current events.

These conceptualizations have given rise to two interesting hypotheses:

(1) "Wi thin-context" variation: occupants of complex environments (office buildings, schools, hospitals, etc.) cluster into groups

which differ on the basis of their emergency predispositions; and

(2) "Across-context" variation: emergency responses vary across environmental and social contexts, even for a single individual.

Consider a research design developed to study these general hypotheses.

The class of independent variables of interest in our study of the first

hypothesis is that which defines occupant diversity. Salient variables

would appear to include occupant' sex, location within the building, and

functional role. Independent variables relevant to our study of the

second hypothesis, by contrast, include measures of role diversity

(e.g., a head-o f-household versus a single habitant; an upper echelon

or managerial employee versus low-level functionary), and environmental

diversity (e.g., at home versus at work).

In both cases, the dependent variables include measures of occupants'

predispositions toward fire emergencies. In general, emergency predispositions are seen as complex systems involving emotion and motivation, beliefs and expectations about one's own per formance, likelihood

of success during a fire situation, and perception of one's role and

social responsibility. Moreover, predisposition systems are presumed

to operate along an orientation dimension, as well. That is, an individual may have distinct emergency predispositions with regard to self,

other persons, and physical objects in the environment.

3.2 METHODS AND PROCEDURE

The first hypothesis considered above advances the idea that a given

population will cluster into smaller groups on the basis of, for example

occupants' locations within a building, sex, functional role, and other

factors which influence emergency cognitive sets and predispositions.

The second hypothesis suggests that sets and predispositions are not

invariant, even for a single person: as he moves from one social or

10
environmental setting to another, his basis for responding to an emergency changes. The problems of identifying clusters within larger

populations, and of monitoring changes in cluster content over time,

have been dealt with through "Q-Methodology" (Stephenson, 1953;

Kerlinger, 1973). Q-Methodology employs a technique enabling a subject

to rank-order stimuli of various kinds, and to reflect his attitudes,

beliefs, or dispositions toward such stimuli.

Individuals record their responses by means of a card-sort instrument

(called a "Q-sort") on which subjects register the degree to which they

approve of particular statements. These statements are written on the

cards, and as the subject considers each card, he sorts it into an appropriate pile (e.g., pile #1 for statements least agreed with; pile til for

statements most agreed with). The specific design of the Q-Sort instrument is discussed below, as are methods for analyzing Q-data.

3.2.1 Instruments

The research instrument for the current problem would consist of Q-sorts,

structured in such a way that the statements to be rank-ordered are descriptive of the variables related through the hypotheses. According

to Stephenson, such a structure is necessary to insure that the instrument tests the hypothesis in question, and not the individual subject,

perse

Statements for inclusion in the Q-Sort are constructed by considering two

dimensions. These are (1) the general affective direction of emergency

attitudes or predispositions (i.e. , reasonable-logical versus emotionalirrational), and (2) the orientation of predispositions (i.e., toward

the self, other people, or the physical environment). This organization

simulates a factorial design consisting of six cells (see Figure 3.1).

In a given Q-sort instrument, each cell might contain a number of statements, every such statement exemplifying the definition of the cell.

Finally, every statement is typewritten onto cards, and the resulting

deck of cards shall comprise the particular Q-sort instrument. Sample

statements are given in Figure 3.2

Stimulus statements utilized in the Q-technique may themselves focus on various aspects of emergency cognitive sets. Some important areas are:

expectations of own (and others') performance in an emergency, beliefs

about chances for success or survival, attributions of causes and the

behavior of others, affects, and motives. A useful approach to these

five issues involves the construction of five separate Q-instruments , each including statements of one type. In this way, the analysis would

be capable of pinpointing specific contributions to attitude differentials.

The actual material for use as statements in the instruments will result

from exploratory investigations involving open-ended interviews and

projective tests. Appropriate items would also be culled from extensive

surveys of the anecdotal and journalistic literature on fire incidents,

11
and from archival materials and official fire reports. Subjects for

interview and projective procedures should be drawn from the same populations as will subjects who finally perform the Q-sorts. During

the instrument construction phase fire victims and fire fighters might

also be interviewed.

3.2.2 Subjects and Field Sites

Hypothesis (1). "Wi thin-context" variation may be studied in a sample

of office buildings, which should be selected on the basis of their

matching on such criteria as: location with the city, architectural

design and spatial configuration, height and size, tenant variety,

number and position of egress alternatives, availability of fire suppression systems (or lack thereof), and emergency history.

Subjects for the Q-sort procedure are selected from the study sites to

reflect a three-dimensional factorial design (see Figure 3.3). As discussed earlier, the dimensions include: functional role within the

building (upper-echelon management, low-level functionary, visitor),

location within the building (top k stories, bottom k stories), and

sex. Subjects in each cell should be matched for such factors as age,

history of fire involvement, familiarity with the building's layout,

and participation in evacuation drills or other emergency training

programs

Hypothesis (2) . The examination of "across-context” variation employs

another set of subjects drawn from the sample of study sites described

above. Subjects are again matched on the basis of criteria outlined

above. Here, however, subjects are selected to reflect a two-dimensional

design. These dimensions are: functional role within various environmental contexts (i.e., head-o f-household versus single-habitant, upperlevel managerial employee versus low-echelon worker), and sex (refer to

Figure 3.4).

In order to test predispositional variations across roles and contexts,

each subject performs the Q-sort task for each of two situations: potential fires in both the home and work environments. In effect, then, the

design is expanded into a three-dimensional arrangement.

3.2.3 Procedure

Data Gathering . Subjects in each design sort Q-decks by distributing

cards into piles reflecting the degree to which they agree or disagree

with the statement contained, (as discussed above). Persons are instructed to sort only the designated number of cards into each pile,

so that the Q-sort will reflect a quasi-normal distribution across the

agreement continuum (Stephenson, 1953). For each subject, the score

for any statement will be taken as the numerical value of the pile in

which it was placed.

12
Data Analysis , Statement seOi.es can be correlated for each pair of

respondents, and the resulting correlation matrix can be factor analyzed.

The resulting factors, or clusters, will contain persons who distributed

„ the Q-sorts similarly. This procedure may be repeated for each Qinstruments as are actually administered. Support for the hypotheses

can be inferred if person-clusters reflect those postulated (refer to

Figures 3.2 and 3.3).

An additional test of either hypothesis may be achieved through the

analysis of variance. Here, the means of statement scores for all Ss

in a cell may be compared to assess the direction of emotionality and

locus of orientation of persons within that cell. Qualitative support

for either hypothesis might then be assumed if inter-cell differences

in emotionality and orientation are in appropriate directions. The

hazards of conducting analysis of variance in a non-experimental context

should be recognized. The use of more stringent significance levels

(say the .01 level), however, may permit us some confidence in using

ANOVA as a secondary or supportive test in this case (as suggested by

Kerlinger, 1973).

3.3 UTILITY OF THE DESIGN

The analytical investigation of human responses to fire poses many com- plex problems. Chief among these are the identification of important

qualities of occupants' emergency response, the establishment of

research settings which facilitate the study of these qualities, and

the gathering of valid data. Traditional laboratory experimentation

may provide the most convenient and economical means for investigating

certain well-defined problems (e.g., the visual perception of illuminated

exit signs through smoke of varying density). However, the contrived

laboratory setting may be unable to provide the richness and variation

of experience found in our everyday use of buildings. Consequently,

the "field experiment" seems appropriate. Here, experimental or quasiexperimental manipulations are conducted directly upon actual settings,

as these settings occur within the environment. Subjects are "real

people," engaged in their normal, everyday tasks (save, of course, for

periodic interventions by the experimenter).

In the design reviewed above, the field-experimental approach was recom- mended for studying perception and cognition with respect to potential

fire emergencies. The execution of this design is expected to yield

data suggesting ways in which persons who differ in their predispositions

toward fires may in fact behave during real emergencies.

13
DIRECTION

OF

ATTITUDES

AND

PREDISPOSITIONS

ORIENTATIONS

(1)

toward

self

(2)

toward

other

people

(3)

toward

objects in

the env ' t

(A)

Reasonable

(obj ective;

adaptive)

A1 A2* A3

(B)

Emotional

(maladaptive) B

B2 B3

* n statements per cell

Figure 3.1 Factorial Structure of Q-Sort Statement Categories

14
CELL Al: Reasonable / Toward self

"If I ever heard the fire alarm go off in this building,

I'd walk toward the nearest stairway, and proceed to the

street.

CELL Bl: Emotional / Toward self

"I think I'd panic if I ever heard the fire alarm go off."

CELL A2: Reasonable / Toward other people

"If there was ever a fire here, I'd try my best to warn

other occupants before evacuating myself."

CELL B2: Emotional / Toward other poeple

"Personally, I don't think you could trust anyone when

disaster strikes."

CELL A3: Reasonable / Toward objects in the environment

"In the event of a fire, I'd make a reasonable attempt

to secure irreplaceable documents. But, I'm only human."

CELL B3: Emotional / Toward objects in the environment

"I could never evacuate my room without collecting my

family-photos.

Figure 3.2 Sample Q-Sort Statements
ROLE

/

FUNCTION

ACTUAL LOCATION WITHIN

THE BUILDING

Figure 3.3 Factorial Design for Hypothesis (1)
FUNCTIONAL

ROLES

Figure 3.4 Factorial Design for Hypothesis (2)
4. DESIGN THREE: A FIELD- EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN FOR EVALUATING EMERGENCY

TRAINING PROGRAMS

4.1 ISSUES

The question of whether pre-emergency training programs are effective

in promoting appropriate behaviors during actual fire emergencies has

been asked many times. However, empirical treatment of this problem

is generally unavailable. Even Pauls (1975), who recorded pedestrian

flow patterns in exit stairways during fire drills in high-rise office

buildings, did not systematically investigate the influence of training

or drill performance.

Let us consider an expansion of Paul's investigation, and consider

relationships between the physical design of buildings, occupants'

emergency cognitive sets, and the influence of such relationships

upon training and drill effectiveness. Specifically: (a) what are the

effects of pre-emergency training on the probability that occupants

will recognize effective egress routes and safety-related elements in

the environment, in the event of a building fire? (b) are the effects

of training programs influenced by variations in the complexity of

a building's physical layout and design? Again, we use an office

building as an example.

On the assumption that the quantity and quality of physical -environmental

stimuli may interact with training programs intended to promote adaptive

responses to stressful situations, two hypotheses are offered as tentative answers to the above questions: (a) in both complexly and simply

organized office buildings, significantly more occupants receiving

building-specific pre-emergency training will recognize effective egress

routes and a larger number of safety-related design features, than will

occupants receiving no training; and (b) occupants participating in a general (non-building-specific) training program will recognize effective

egress routes, and safety-related design features, significantly more frequently in buildings of simple - rather than complex - organization.

4.1.1 Concepts and Operational Definitions

The two independent variables include "building organization," and "type

of pre-emergency training program". Building organization is defined

here in terms of two levels: simple and complex. Simple physical organizations may be characterized by "open" floor plans which permit visual

access to means of egress from most points on the floor, and by short,

linear circulation routes. Complex organizations, in contrast, are denoted by the subdivision of floor areas into many small spaces (each

with an extremely limited view of egress routes) and by lengthy, mean- dering corridor networks. The emergency training variable is defined

in terms of three levels, including participation in "building specific"

or "general" pre-emergency training programs, or participation in no program at all. These programs have already been described earlier.

18

|
The two dependent variables to be measured include "recognition of

adaptive emergency egress routes", and "recognition of safety-related

features and objects in the environment". Recognition of egress routes

is measured by scoring the quality of routes on maps created by occupants

during an exercise. The number of safety-related features (e.g. , com- munications apparatus, operable windows, fire doors, etc.) included in

a subject's map is taken as his score on this variable. The mapping

task requires subjects to recall routes and features without any prior

warning, approximately two weeks following the completion of training

programs. Maps should be rated independently by a number of judges.

4.2 METHODS AND PROCEDURE

4.2.1 Design

A 2 x 3 factorial design is indicated by the above discussion, and we shall consider subjects randomly assigned to each cell (refer to

Figure 4.1a). The basic approach is primarily an expansion of the posttest only control-group design (Campbell and Stanley, 1963), and is

described in Figure 4.1b. An additional expansion of the design may be

adopted, however, which permits "retrospective-pretest" (Campbell and

Stanley, p. 66) measures (denoted by "(0)" in Figure 4.1c) to be utilized

in distinguishing between subjects who vary on such factors as previous

experience in building fires or with safety programs, predispositions

to anxiety in connection with potentially stressful or dangerous situations, etc.

4.2.2 Selecting Research Sites

Buildings are selected from a population of office structures matched

along the following criteria: (a) architectural design concept,

(b) typical floor area dimensions, (c) mean population, and (d) emergency warning and evacuation facilities. A population so defined is

subdivided into two categories: those having relatively simple, and

those having complex spatial organizations on typical study- floors.

Buildings in each sub-category should then be pretested to cross-validate

the simplicity-complexity perceptions of the research judges with those

of actual users. Sites of each type are selected, representing to the

extent possible, extremes of simplicity and complexity, as defined by

users' own ratings. Subjects interviewed in the site-selection pretest

should work neither for the same tenant, nor on the same floor, as participants in the main experiment.

Finally, study-floors are selected at the sites, from among those floors

in the building judged representative of the structure's simplicity or complexity characteristic.

19
4.2.3

Subject Sample

From the study-floor of each site, female secretaries may be randomly

selected. Subjects range from between 25 and 30 years of age, and may

not otherwise be matched.

4.2.4 Outline of Procedure

In summary, such a study may be implemented through the following procedure.

(1) Select study-sites (and study-floors).

(2) Randomly select subjects at each site.

(3) Randomly assign sites to the treatment categories (training

program types: specific, general or none), such that there are two

sites per category.

(4) Administer the training programs.

(5) Administer the mapping task at a randomly selected time,

approximately two weeks after completion of the training program.

Subjects are individually called into an office temporarily occupied by

the reseacher for this purpose, and are asked to (a) "map their way out

of the building" (from their own work stations) in the event of a fire

alarm, and to (b) identify and locate various features and objects in

the environment which might be useful during the emergency period.

(6) Approximately two weeks after the mapping task, interview all

subjects for the purpose of collecting retrospective-pretest data, such

as previous experience with actual fires and/or safety training, predispositions to anxiety, etc.

(7) Debrief all participants.

4.2.5 Data Analysis: A Brief Note

Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) may be utilized to assess experimental

effects taking into account any variation among Ss along the covariate

measures. Snedecor and Cochran (1967) have demonstrated the expansion

of ANCOVA to the case of multiple covariance in a two-way design.

However, this technique would require separate and independent analyses

for each dependent variable (route and feature recognition). To account

for the possibility of interdependency between these variables, either

a multi-variate extension of two-way multiple covariance analysis, or

a canonical regression analysis would be indicated.

20
4.3 UTILITY OF THE DESIGN

The ultimate effectiveness of emergency training programs is an important

issue, and the evaluation of such programs may raise complex problems.

For example, several factors may operate in unison during a single drill

or practice event, and the relative contribution of each may be difficult

to ascertain. Moreover, the mock-fire may not adequately replicate important qualities of a real emergency, rendering the question of just what

is being evaluated virtually indeterminate, and worse, leaving the participants ill-prepared.

Again, a field experimental research scheme has been suggested. Through

the application of the approach described above, a systematic investigation of the relative contribution of multiple factors is possible. In

addition, the naturalistic field setting permits, to as great a degree

as possible, subjects to respond to the environments and situations with

which they are already familiar, and which have some meaning in the

context of their everyday lives.

21
PRE-EMERGENCY

TRAINING

PROGRAM

PHYSICAL LAYOUT AND DESIGN

simple complex

buildingspecif ic

general n subjects

per cell

none

Figure 4.1(a) 2x3 Factorial Design

22
R:

R:

cn

PL, PDO

PdO

R:

T ime-S equenc e of Experimental

Activities ——7I

LEGEND: R:

X,

subjects are randomly assigned to each group

- X : experimental manipulations

o

- 0,: observations and measures

b

Figure 4.1(b) Expansion of Campbell and Stanley's "Post-Test

Only Control-Group" Design

23
GROUPS

Time-Sequence

of Experimental

Activities

\

R: <°>i ; x

i

i °i

R: (0)

: x

2 ! °2

R:

LEGEND: R: Subjects are randomly assigned to each group

(0)

1 - (0)^ : Retrospective pretest measures

X^ - X^: experimental manipulations

0, - 0,: observations and measures

1 b

Figure 4.1(c) Design expanded to include "Retrospective Pretest"

Covariate Measures

24
5 . SUMMARY

Our ability to reduce the incidence of deaths and injuries due to building fires depends greatly upon our understanding of human responses

during fire situations. Unfortunately, however, no universally accepted

model of occupants' responses during fires is currently available. Moreover, doubt surrounds the validity and reliability of data-gathering

techniques now applied to this problem. The consequence is that knowledge

development is neither cooperative, complementary, nor cumulative.

This report presented three research designs, each aimed at mitigating

this problem by introducing additional levels of analysis into the study

of responses to fires. Both exploratory and experimental procedures were were considered in various problem contexts.

The problems of building egress and of occupants' response to fire are

special foci of several programs in the United States, including those

of the Center for Building Technology and the Center for Fire Research,

both of the National Engineering Laboratory, National Bureau of Standards.

Research designs of the type suggested here are particularly suited to

the goals of these programs. Consequently, a major effort employing

more rigorous methods of analyzing human responses in building emergencies

is anticipated. But this effort will succeed only to the extent that

valid and well-founded data bases inform life safety design regulation.

Behavioral science contributions must be shown to be at least as informative as the traditions of engineering practice.

25
REFERENCES

Archea , J. Personal communications. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept, of

Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, 1977.

Bickman, L. A nursing home fire. Presented at the Seminar on Behavior

in Fires, Surrey, U.K., Univ. of Surrey, 1976.

Bickman, L. A model of human behavior in a fire emergency. Chicago:

Loyola Univ. of Chicago, Applied Social Psychology, 1977.

Breaux, J. , Canter, D. and Sime , J. of people in fire situations.

Fire Research Unit, 1976.

Breaux, J. Personal communications.

Fire Research Unit, 1977.

Bryan, J. L. Smoke as a determinant

tions. Washington, D.C.: U.S.

of Standards, NBS-GCR-77-94.

Psychological aspects of behavior

Surrey, U.K. : Univ. of Surrey,

Surrey, U.K.: Univ. of Surrey,

of human behavior in fire situaDept. of Commerce, National Bureau

Campbell, D. and Stanley, J. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs

for research. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963.

Canter, D. , Breaux, J. and Sime, J. Personal communications. Surrey,

U.K. : Univ. of Surrey, Fire Research Unit, 1976.

Cook, T. and Campbell, D. The design and conduct of quasi-experiments

and true experiments in field settings. In Dunnette, M. (ed.),

Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Chicago:

Rand McNally, 1976.

Dynes, R. and Quarantelli, E. Group behavior under stress. Sociology

and social research, 1968, 52, 4, 416-429.

Haber, G. Fire as environment. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept, of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, Unpubl . ms., 1977.

Kerlinger, F. Foundations of behavioral research. New York: Holt,

Rinehart and Winston, 1973.

Lerup, L. People in Fires: a manual for mapping. Berkeley, Ca.

Univ. of California, College of Environmental Design, Architecture Life Safety Group, 1977.

Pauls, J. Movement of people in buildings. Presented at the Symposium

on Human Response to Tall Buildings, Chicago, July 1975.

26
Pauls, J. Management and movement of building occupants in emergencies.

Presented at the Conference on Designing to Survive Severe Hazards,

ITT Research Institute, Chicago, November 1977.

Rubin, A. and Cohen, A. Human behavior in building fires. Washington,

D.C.: U.S. Dept, of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards,

TN-818, 1974.

Selltiz, C. , Jahoda, M. , Deutch, M. and Cook, S. Research methods in

social relations . New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1959.

Snedecor, G. and Cochran, W. Statistical Methods, 6th Edition. Ames,

Iowa: Iowa State Univ. Press, 1967.

Stahl, F. Some prospects for simulating human behavior in high-rise

building fires: a pilot demonstration. In Suedfeld, P. and

Russell, J. (eds.), The behavioral basis of design, Book 1.

Stroudsburg, Pa.: Dowden, Hutchinson, and Ross, 1976.

Stahl, F. Simulating human behavior in high-rise building fires.

Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept, of Commerce, National Bureau of

Standards, NBS-GCR-77-92 , 1975, issued 1977.

Stahl, F. and Archea, J. An assessment of the technical literature on emergency egress from buildings. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept, of

Commerce, National Bureau of Standards, NBSIR 77-1313, 1977.

Stephenson, W. The study of behavior: Q-technique and its methodology . Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1953.

Webb, E., Campbell, D. , Schwartz, R. and Sechrest, L. Unobtrusive

measures. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1966.

Wood, P. G. The behavior of people in fires. London: Dept, of the

Environment and Fire Officers' Committee, Joint Fire Research

Organization, November 1972.

27
NBS-1 1 4A rev. n -77

1. PUBLICATION OR REPORT NO. NBSIR 78-1508

U.S. DEPT. OF COMM. BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET

2. Gov’t Accession

No.

3. Recipient’s Accession No.

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

Human Response to Fire: Three Designs for Research

5. Publication Date August 1978

6. Performing Organization Code

7. AUTHOR(S) Fred I. Stahl 8. Performing Organ. Report No.

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20234

10. Project/Task/Work Unit No. 7431121

11. Contract /Grant No.

12. Sponsoring Organization Name and Complete Address (Street, City, State, ZIP)

Same as Item 9

13. Type of Report & Period Covered i nter im:

Nov 1977 - Jan 1978

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

16. ABSTRACT ( A 200-word or less factual summary of most significant information. If document includes a significant

bibliography or literature survey, mention it here.) As a group, empirical investigators of the responses of building occupants to

emergencies employ idiosyncratic, non-replicable techniques for research design,

data acquisition, and data analysis. As a result, it has been difficult to

explain the influence of many, often uncontrolled, variables. This shortcoming

has frequently rendered research findings indeterminate and non-cumulative

This paper explores three exemplary research design strategies, each aimed at

mitigating these problems by introducing a greater degree of rigor into the study

of human responses to fires. Both exploratory and experimental designs are considered in various problem contexts.

17. KEY WORDS (six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only the first letter of the first key word unless a proper name; separated by semicolons)

Architectural psychology; environmental psychology; fire escape; fire safety;

human research; research design.

18. AVAILABILITY fJT Unlimited 19. SECURITY CLASS

(THIS REPORT)

21. NO. OF PAGES

For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

UNCLASSIFIED

31

Q _ Order From Sup. of Doc., U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402. SD Stock No. SN00JP00J

20. SECURITY CLASS’

(THIS PAGET

UNCLASSIFIED

22. Price

[x Order From National Technical Information Service (NTIS)

Springfield, Virginia 22151 $4.50

uscomm-dc ttoae-Pi