Document Type: Original Article

Authors

1 Road Traffic Injury Research Center, Department of Statistics and Epidemiology, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran.

2 Road Traffic Injury Research Center, Health Management and Safety Promotion Research Institute, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

3 2Health Policy Research Center, Institute of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran; 3Research Center for Neuromodulation and Pain , Shiraz, Iran

4 Safety Promotion and Injury Prevention Research Center, Student Research Committee, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

5 Department of Public Health, School of Public Health & Research Center for Health Sciences, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran

6 Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

7 Health Policy Research Center, Institute of Health, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran

Abstract

Objective: Pedestrians are road users vulnerable to traffic injuries and fatalities. This study aimed to develop and validate a pedestrian behavior questionnaire to be used in Iran.
Methods: In this cross-sectional study, the initial questionnaire was designed based on the evaluation of previous studies conducted world-wide or in Iran. The initial pack included 127 items. After the assuring the face validity of the questionnaire, 27 experts’ opinions in the field of traffic was obtained for assessing/improving the content validity. To test the reliability of the questionnaire, the test-retest method and internal consistency assessment were used. To evaluate the structural validity, the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) using the principal component and the Varimax rotation was applied.
Results: After completing the face validity and after summarizing the experts’ suggestions, 12 questions were deleted. By calculating the content validity ratio and coefficient, 20 and 17 were removed. Also, the average content validity coefficient regarding relevancy, clarity and overall average were 0.86, 0.88, and 0.87, respectively. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.84. In the last stage and according to the results of the factor analysis, five factors violations, distraction, positive behaviors (group1), positive behaviors (group2) and Aggressive behaviors) were identified from the 29-items questionnaire, which explained 98% of the total variance.
Conclusion: Considering the necessity of using a verified and validated tool for planning and evaluating effective interventions for pedestrians is inevitable. The tool designed in the study was found to be valid and reliable for use to measure pedestrian’s behavior and planning to modify high-risk behaviors and enhance safe pedestrian behaviors.

Keywords