MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7079201801

Understanding Gap Crossing Decisions Across the Lifespan

2025· article· en· W7079201801 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPedestrianIntersection (aeronautics)Closing (real estate)Pedestrian crossingPoison controlHuman factors and ergonomicsFalling (accident)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By 2063, it is expected that one in four Canadians will be over the age of 65 (Government of Canada, 2022), demonstrating the urgent need to understand how aging impacts safety in everyday environments. Older adults (OA) are disproportionately represented in pedestrian fatalities, in part due to age-related declines in visuomotor integration. Much of what is known about risky pedestrian behaviour is derived from simulator-based studies examining street crossing decisions, which have provided valuable insights into the perceptual, cognitive, and motor abilities that increase collision risk. However, our understanding of how people use optical information to guide behaviour when navigating closing gaps, and how this ability changes across the lifespan, remains limited. Furthermore, few studies have directly examined the cortical activity underlying gap crossing decisions, which may offer insight into why errors occur. Therefore, the purpose of this thesis was to take an integrative approach across two studies, to examine age-related differences in: 1) the use of visual information to guide speed adjustments while navigating closing gaps in virtual reality, and 2) cortical activation associated with decisions of gap passability. In Study 1, 15 younger adults (YA; 21.7 +/-1.3 yrs) and 15 OA (69.4 +/-3.8 yrs) completed a virtual path crossing task, by walking through an intersection while virtual pedestrians (VPs) approached from either side at various speeds, creating shrinking gaps. Participants were asked to adjust their own speed as necessary to avoid collisions. Results revealed that YA modulated the onset, magnitude, and rate of speed change based on the VP speed, demonstrating efficient use of visual cues to inform their behaviour. Alternatively, OA used a fixed “one solution fits all” approach, initiating speed changes with consistent timing and larger magnitudes across all conditions, placing them at greater risk in faster gap-closing scenarios. To better understand the cognitive demands underlying these behaviours, Study 2 involved a treadmill-based version of a similar task. Thirteen YA (22.5 +/- 3.9 yrs) and 14 OA (69.7 +/- 3.3 yrs) indicated whether approaching VP gaps were passable. Using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), cortical activity was measured during decision-making. Although both groups made similar decisions with comparable response times, OA exhibited greater and more sustained activation of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, suggesting an increased need for cognitive resources compared to YA. This finding may reflect reduced neural efficiency or a compensatory response to maintain task performance. Together, these studies demonstrate that aging affects both the behavioural strategies and neural processes involved in path crossing decisions. Recognizing how older adults perceive, process, and respond to dynamic environments can inform the design of safer public spaces and targeted interventions that promote mobility, cognitive efficiency, and independence across the lifespan.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University)→Same topicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping→French-language works237,207→