MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412866176 · doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2025.103793

Pedestrians’ social empathy and interaction with wheelchair users: The impact of user gestures and mobility aid design in a pilot study

2025· article· en· W4412866176 on OpenAlexaff
Mohsen Rasoulivalajoozi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Industrial Ergonomics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHuman-Animal Interaction Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWheelchairGestureEmpathyHuman–computer interactionSocial relationHuman factors and ergonomicsComputer sciencePsychologyEngineeringPhysical medicine and rehabilitationPoison controlWorld Wide WebMedicineSocial psychologyMedical emergencyArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wheelchair users (WUs) experience various accessibility challenges in public spaces, which may lead them to seek assistance from pedestrians in difficult situations. In this context, understanding the factors influencing pedestrians' empathy and interaction with WUs facilitates their social interactions in challenging urban situations. This study examines how WUs’ body gestures and wheelchair design characteristics (WDCs) impact pedestrian perception and interaction. A pilot cross-sectional study was conducted with 52 participants in two phases: (1) a questionnaire assessing willingness to engage with WUs exhibiting independent or help-seeking gestures, and (2) evaluating four wheelchair types—from conventional to advanced—using key semantic descriptors of appearance and social perception. Findings revealed no significant relationship between age, gender, and willingness to interact across the two gesture conditions (p > 0.05), except for a significant association between age and willingness to interact with users of advanced powered wheelchairs in the help-seeking gesture condition (p = 0.027). Also, pedestrians' willingness to interact was significantly higher when WUs exhibited help-seeking gestures compared to independence gestures (p < 0.001). WDCs influenced pedestrian perceptions more strongly when WUs displayed independence (86.3 %) than help-seeking gestures (50 %). Moreover, analysis of semantic evaluations revealed distinct perceptual dimensions for advanced manual and powered wheelchairs, with three principal components identified for each, offering valuable insights for developing wheelchairs with greater social polish. This study highlights that both WDC and user gestures significantly affect pedestrian interaction, with the masking effect of help gestures on WDCs being a key finding. Additionally, advanced WDCs signify WUs' independence, helping reduce negative social stereotypes among pedestrians.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.147
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.061
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.317 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Industrial ErgonomicsSame topicHuman-Animal Interaction StudiesFrench-language works237,207