Like many of the other Generational Curriculum papers that was orally presented, three-fourths of the paper gave information on library research(using CD-rom etc). But the papers did contain enough information on the writers thoughts and opinions regarding related situations and topics to traffic psychology. The paper I had was written by Gregory Takeda. I will be describing the information relating to traffic psychology that was given in the paper................
CROSSWALKS & PEDESTRIANS
In regards to crosswalks, the writer states that if a pedestrian is waiting at a crosswalk, with no traffic light, the pedestrian will experience endless waiting. If pedestrain waiting to cross the street doesn't make the initial effort, for example taking a step off of the street, no drivers will stop and let them cross. This shows that drivers will, not be courteous, or take the time to let pedestrians cross,"if they don't have to". If I was the pedestrian,I wouldn't even bother trying to cross a street without a traffic light with the crossing signals. Even though you have the right of way(as a pedestrian in a crosswalk), you are at potantial risk for getting hit. Pedestrian involved accidents is common, and I would rather not take the chance. So even if I have to walk a little further to use a crosswalk that is assisted with a traffic light and signals for crossing, I ssy it's worth it. You may be a careful crosswalk user and abider, but others (drivers) may not be caustious and aware of you all the time. There are other alternatives.......improving the conditions of crosswalks to make them more visible and detectabel by drivers.....Take a look at my suggestions on crosswalks
Another point the student brought up was a good idea. He mentioned programs for facilitating pedestrian crossing should be established. Incorporating these kinds of programs to youn children will make them more caustious drivers as well as pedestrains. I think that these programs could also be beneficial for the elderly persons also, for the elderly tend to walk more, and use public transportation because they cannot drive. Also enrollment in other classes relating to driving and traffic situation, will help many persons be trained for quick, safe and accurate response to an unexpected situation. This would also decrease the number of pedestrain related accidents and make bothe the driver and the pedestrain more cautious and courteous of each other. A unique and unusual approach the student writer had, was makinf areas free of motor vehicles, enforced by a pedestrian advocate. I think this would be too costly, our state has no money as it is, and we don't have enough space. He also mentions a "pedestrian buffer zone", that should be acknowledged and incorporated into building and construction designs. This would mean creating 2.4-2.5 square foot buffer zone between you and other pedestrians, when standing at a certain area, waiting to cross. He says that any distance closer would be considered "friendly" and intimate as the distance becomes even smaller.
My reaction to these ideas mentioned..........W E I R D....... anyway I must commend him for a very unique approach. As I mentioned above that making avilable programs for young children is a very good idea, because when you teach kids the first time the right way of doing things, they tend to do it that way for as long as they live. I think that it would be impossibl;e to create those buffer zones, becuase it would only create to more unecessary arguments about who's space this is etc.......Can you imagine the people living in Japan? There are so many people, on the train, on the streets, walking etc.......The people on the streets have the right of way over the cars, trust me, I have lived there, you can probably scare one to five people walking in a a group, but not 30-50...............majority rules......
I thought that I should at least take a moment to incorporate something I learned in my other PSY class that mentioned something on technology.....If looked at the usage of automobiles, as a form of transportaion technology, most of us would say it's great.....It is a faster, comfortable, and convenient way to travel. But the problem is, we are not realizing, that the usage of cars, is taking away physical exercise from us. Americans do not have enough exercise......and using cars as a means for transportaion is taking away that little amount of exercise we would get by walking to places or bus stops.........So technology has it's goods and bads,but has it caused us to be more unhealthy? Do we have to sacrifice our health for convenience?For more concers or information on health take a look Public Health Academics
Well, I learned that there are more than one way of looking and interpreting things. Some people do have their own opinions and thoughts about driving, and until, we ourselves can not be bias and streotypic in judging others and ourselves, we can make more effective observations. I do think that the student learned to look at things from a pedestrians perspective. Then our views will not be one-sided. We need to experience both kinds of situations to make accurate adjustments. The content of Gregory Takeda's paper does have relevence to traffic psychology because, drivers are not the only ones on the road, we do share it with pedestrians too. Lastly, he does mention that there is a cycle of frustration/aggression that exists. Aggression/frustration can indirectly heighten other hostile tendencies, escalating everything else, possibly one day leading to a sudden burst of it built up, hta may occur when driving, causing the driver to drive how he/she feels.