Various Influencing Factors on Human Behavior within a Fire Situation - Case Study Example

Various Influencing Factors on Human Behavior within a Fire Situation 1. Introduction In disaster situations such as a fire, there are many human lives involved. The actions, behaviors and failure of acting can contribute to how the disaster is managed and on the final outcome of the disaster. In a fire situation, victims as well rescuers and observers can play crucial roles which influence the outcome of the fire. In fact it is the actions and omissions of actions which cause the fires in the first place. This paper assesses various aspects of human behavior that impact the causes and outcomes of a fire situation. 2. Individual related Factors that affect behavior Different people react differently in different situations. There are beliefs, values, characteristics, context and various others. The demographics all influence the way people react to disasters. The key factors that affect the way an individual will react in a fire situation includes age, size, physical condition and fitness, furthermore, respiratory capacity and influence of drugs, medications or alcohol (Vaught et.al 2000). In addition to above, how individuals react to a disaster situation as a fire is also, depends upon a complex pattern of human behavior. These behavior patterns can be grouped in to what is called the decision process of individuals. The six elements which make up the decision process include recognition, validation, definition, evaluation, commitment, and reassessment. The combination of elements within the decision process differs from individual to individual, making each react differently from the other (Flathers et al. 1982). The first element in the decision process is Recognition. Here the individual is recognizing or realizing the threat of fire and reacting to it. Depending on age, experience and the magnitude of the threat, the recognition can be low or non existence. The second element is validation where by the individual attempts to determine the seriousness of the threat cues. For instance, the question which will come, “Do we evacuate the building?” or “Do you smell smoke?” are indications of how they attempt to validate. Thirdly, the definition takes place where the individual relates information concerning the threat to some certain variable. For example, the qualitative nature of the threat, the magnitude of the fire and how fast it will spread. Evaluation is the next element in this stage where the individual uses cognitive and psychological activities required to respond to the threat. The individual’s ability to manage the stress and anxiety levels became an essential psychological factor. Having evaluated the situation next element of the decision process is Commitment where by the individual will initiate behavior that is required to implement the decisions he or she made in the evaluation stage. If it was to fight the fire, then actions will include search for firefighting equipments various others. Finally, the individual will Reassess the decision effectiveness. This is the most stressful for the individual within the decision process. It takes place with the failure of previous attempts and evaluations. Seeing that, successive failures are encountered the individual will become more frustrated and less rational (Flathers et al. 1982). 3. Additional Factors Relevant to Individual Behaviors within Group Context As per Subramaniam (2004). There are several other factors also, influence involvement and behavior in a fire emergency situation, especially within group context. Such difference in behavior can be attributed to “predisposing factors in the characteristics of the individual for instance, belief, attitudes and values that facilitate or hinder self-protective behavior” (Subramaniam (2004). Furthermore, possible that these values and beliefs also, affecting the need for helping others and concern for other members who may have become victim to the fire. Studies have identified some of the main activities that are common to be undertaken by people within a fire situation. These include evacuation of the building, fight or control the fire, alert other individuals, and alert the fire department (Introduction to Fire Science Section, 2001). Some additional factors that affect individual behavior and reactions to fire situation especially in a group setting include avoidance, commitment, affiliation and role. When considering “avoidance” factor, people tend to be in denial until a certain point of time in recognizing the fire threat. An example of how people refuse to respond to fire alarms immediately is a sign of avoidance in place. They consider it as a false alarm and deny the unpleasant situation (Introduction to Fire Science Section, 2001). Moreover, the commitment factor where most people maintain their involvement or commitment to the activity or the group. Despite the alarm signals, some tend to attempt at completing their tasks or look for cues in other members of the vicinity for reactions. As per Turner and Toft [1989] this group commitment and family commitment was evident in fires such as Summerland Leisure Centre fire in which individuals based their actions on family group membership often looking for their children (Turner and Toft, 1989). Affiliation is one of the main factors that affect the behavior of individuals in a fire situation that involves groups of people. Social and family affiliations prompt people to act as a group even if they are strangers (Johnson 1987). Speed of evacuation is often determined by the ability of the members of the group. On other scenarios, they may attempt to fight the fire even when signals indicate to them that the intensity and size of the fire is too much for their caliber. The role status in a disaster situation is derived through familiarity, knowledge and capabilities. 4. The Impact of the Physical Setting The physical setting of the fire situation can also affect the human behavior drastically. The way a person would behave if a fire breaks out in the home is different from how they would behave in a different place. At home the individual is more familiar about the setting and layout of the building and exit routes. However, in unfamiliar locations, the unfamiliarity of the physical settings of the building can cause confusion. Case study of Townhouse fire in Washington DC, in which the physical settings of the building such as, the air inlets and exhausts or the Kings Cross fire in which the draft effect of wind can greatly increase the rapid spread of fire (Howarth and Zaitria, 1999). Distinguishing features such as shopping malls, food service outlets and other operations in public passenger terminals. For example, Gatwick Airport North Terminal or the extensively redeveloped Manchester Victoria Station are described by various researchers on fire safety subject as interesting fire safety challenge (Bramhall 1996). Such features and physical settings of buildings in which a fire breaks out can influence the human behavior markedly. For instance, if they are aware of cooking areas in the building and that gas explosions can happen as a result of spread of fire, evacuation will be more chaotic. Furthermore, the design, construction and layout of various buildings also, impact the way in which the occupants react. Some material used as glass or highly combustible material can spread the fire quicker or cause explosions. For example, in older buildings, the materials used contribute to faster development of the fire. People who are aware of such threats of the physical setting may panic and their reactions will be marked with more urgency (Howarth & Zaitri, 1999).   Another aspect to consider in the nature of physical setting is the size of the location compared to the number of occupants. When a fire breaks out, this influence individual behavior as cramped areas in panicky situations can increase stress levels and elevate irrational and aggressive behavior. Also, the cause stampedes in an event the location is housing large number of occupants and the layout involves narrow passages which are strongly built so that it cannot give way to pressure of the evacuating crowds. Dormitories and community halls or sports arenas are some examples of such physical settings. The distance to safe grounds can also influence the individual behavior within a fire situation. Occupants in top floors of a high rise building are likely to react more urgently than those in ground level floors. High distance from top floors to ground through fire exists and inability to use lifts can create panic also alarm and urgency in some individuals. When people have to use difficult stair ways to get to safety, the evacuation is slowed and people can become more aggressive or less patient. Small children, disabled people and elderly persons may find such fire evacuation routes difficult to use if the nature of the building includes many stories and difficult stair ways. 5. Impact of the characteristics of the fire on Human Behavior How people react to fire is impacted by the hazards produced by a fire situation. The conditions to be aware of are temperature, heat, smoke, and oxygen depletion. The effects of these vary by the length of exposure. The severity of each characteristics of fire can vary from incident to incident. Some of these characteristics for example, smoke or oxygen depletion can cause mental distortions that confuse and make their behaviors irrational. All these elements can render the individual incapacitated or dead depending upon severity (Introduction to Fire Science Section, 2001). The main characteristic of a fire incident which can determine the human behavior is temperature. Some fires can have severed heat which will result in unbearable pain and collapse of respiratory system. As the length of exposure to temperature can alter the outcomes, people caught in a fire will attempt to evacuate urgently through physical reflexes as well as with mental signals recognizing the threat for life. Smoke obscuration carry sever life threats and cause various discomforts such as negative visibility; irritation and toxicity caused by inhalation. It also heightens fear. Oxygen depletion cause by fire situations can affect the human behavior drastically (Introduction to Fire Science Section, 2001). Normal oxygen in the atmosphere is 21%. When this percentage drops it causes physiological effects. Exposure to fire gases for instance, Carbon Monoxide CO can also impact the human behavior. Exposure can carry fatal effects and involve nausea, headaches and dizziness which will impair individual’s ability to react and behave in certain desirable manners within a fire situation. It is therefore evident that the nature of fire itself will carry impact on how people will behave in a fire situation. 6. Example of human behavior in Fire Situations – Kings Cross Fire On Nov. 18, 1987, a fire started off in a wooden escalator in Kings Cross subway terminal in London. The resulting fire incident took the life of over 30 people. This fire is an ideal case study of how human behavior can cause and impact the outcome of a fire catastrophe. The cause of fire was attributed to a burning match which was discarded by a commuter who disregarded no smoking regulations (Fennell 1988, p. 111). Here itself the fire cause can be attributed to the carelessness of human behavior. Various descriptions of the fire situation indicate that the initial fire was misevaluated within the decision making process. “The lack of visible flames and relatively clean wood smoke produced lulled the fire fighters into a false sense of security” (Kings Cross Fire - London (2007). The initial fire was described and assessed to be the size and intensity of a campfire and majority of people in the ticket hall falsely believed that fire will not travel downwards. But this assessment proved to be one of the fatal errors of judgment in Kings Cross fire where fires in fact can burn downward. Worst still the heat, the radiation and fuel contents in visibility caused faster traveling of the fire. These two human behaviors of carelessness and miscalculation of the gravity of situation therefore had major impact on the Kings Cross fire. In addition, a fire chief named Townsley’s behavior illustrate how humans act with collectivistic group well being in their minds in a fire situation. When he was leaving a particular section of the fire scene, he spotted a woman who needed help and went to her rescue. However, he was not wearing breathing apparatus and was submerged in smoke and later succumbed to smoke inhalation (Kings Cross Fire - London (2007) This incident indicate how humans are prepared to place themselves in greater danger even at the risk of their own lives for the benefit of another, even a total stranger. 7. Conclusion In conclusion, it can be stated that many aspects would influence human behavior within a fire situation. The differences in decision making process, the group influence, the nature and characteristics of the fire, the impact of physical structures can all contribute to various behaviors and causes of fire outcomes. It is therefore a very complex and interrelated process through in which various individuals involved in a fire situation will react and behave. It is not only the victims but, the onlookers or rescuers behaviors that will finally impact the outcome in terms of what were done and also what was not done. References: Flathers, Garry. Williams, Warlock.Charles. Giffin, and Thomas.Hammer Rockwell. “A Study Of Decision-Making Behavior Of Pilots Deviating From A Planned Flight.” Aviation Space Environ Med. 53.10. (1982) : 958-963. Howarth, Derek and Chakib Kara-Zaitri. “Fire safety management at passenger terminals” Disaster Prevention and Management. 8.5 (1995): 362 – 369. www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/09653569910298288 Introduction to Fire Science Section Unit 4 - Human Behavior and Fire, Flannery Associates. (2001) Johnson N. Panic and the breakdown of social order: popular myth, social theory, empirical evidence. Sociological Focus. 22.1 (1987): 171-183. Kings Cross Fire - London (2007) From The London Fire Journal http://www.firetactics.com/KINGSCROSS.htm Subramaniam, Chandrakanthan “Human factors influencing fire safety measures” Disaster Prevention and Management . Vol, 13.2 (2004): 110-116. www.emeraldinsight.com/10.1108/09653560410534243 Turner B, Toft B [1989]. Fire at Summerland leisure centre. In: Rosenthal U, Charles M, Hart P, eds. Coping with crises: the management of disasters, riots and terrorism. Springfield, Illionoi: Charles Thomas. Vaught, Charles, Brnich. Jr,, M., Mallett, Luana, Henry Cole, William, Wiehagen, Ronald, Conti, Katheleen Kowalski and Charles Litton, “ Behavioral and Organizational Dimensions of Underground Mine Fires” (2000) Retrieved on 12/12/ 2009 from http://www.wvminesafety.org/PDFs/communications/Additional%20Documents/Behavior_in_Underground_Fires.pdf Wood, P.G. (1990), "A survey of behavior in fires", in Canter, David (Eds),Fires and Human Behavior, 2nd ed., David Fulton Publishers, London, Read More