Many persons who are visually impaired cross most intersections safely and independently. However this research confirms the experience of many blind pedestrians as well as Orientation and Mobility Specialists that there is insufficient non-visual information at some intersections to enable most pedestrians who are blind to cross safely at those intersections.

The four San Francisco intersections selected for a comparison of street crossing safety, precision, independence and knowledge were fairly conventional in their design, typical of older downtown areas in western US cities. All had fixed timed signals; none had either vehicular or pedestrian actuation; None had split phase timing for left turns, none had traffic islands, none had an especially great radius of curvature at the corners, and none had blended curbs. None was more than six lanes wide. Nonetheless, in the absence of Talking Signs or any other non-visual system for providing information about intersection geometry's or traffic control systems, participants requested assistance knowing when the Walk interval began on 22.5% of crossings; of the trials on which no assistance was requested, participants started crossing during the flashing Don't Walk or Wait intervals on 17% (9) of the independent crossings. On 19% of trials participants requested assistance in locating the crosswalk, and on 19% of trials they requested assistance completing the crossing.

When participants were provided with additional information by the Talking Signs system, including the onset of the Walk interval, the shape of the intersection, the angle of the crosswalk, and the nature of the traffic control system as well as information regarding location, they were both more successful and more independent. No participant requested assistance knowing when the Walk interval began in the Talking Signs condition, and only one crossing was started out of the Walk interval. Participants requested assistance locating the cross walk on only one trial (3%) and on completing the crossing on only one trial (3%).

While starting a crossing on other than the Walk interval does not always result in pedestrian/vehicular crashes, it unquestionably increases the probability of crashes. Crossings on which pedestrians who are blind find themselves in the midst of moving traffic are frightening even though they may not result in injury. The fear and anxiety induced by such incidents make some blind pedestrians reluctant to venture beyond familiar routes, involving intersections which are well known and which have sufficient acoustic information to enable them accurately to determine the onset of the Walk interval at signalized intersections. The perceived need for assistance in crossing unfamiliar intersections is a source of considerable anxiety and stress to many blind pedestrians, who are unable to see an approaching person from a distance and visually evaluate the probability that that person will be willing and able to offer capable assistance in street crossing. The proportion of times that participants requested assistance was probably lower than would be the case outside the experimental situation, even for these relatively standard intersections; following a number of crossings, participants volunteered that they wouldn't really have crossed independently except for the relative safety provided by the experimental conditions.

Use of the Talking Signs system at intersections appears likely to decrease the probability of crashes between vehicles and pedestrians who are blind. When provided definitive information about the onset of the Walk interval, users can be confident that they know when they have the right of way at a cross walk. Attention can then be fully placed on other acoustic information for crossing, such as the location, speed and direction of turning vehicles. Both the fear of injury and the stress associated with the need to get assistance are decreased. Orientation is improved by provision of unambiguous and definitive information about location and heading, so the anxiety associated with disorientation is also decreased. Therefore, provision of the Talking Signs system at intersections may result in increasing access and ease of travel to employment, and to social, recreational and cultural activities for persons who are visually impaired.

Providing intersection geometry and traffic control information to persons with visual impairments, which is compatible with the needs of visually impaired persons, at signalized intersections is one small, but very important piece of the challenge to provide a unified signage technology which allows all travelers to move efficiently, safely and independently from one environmental context to another in a "seamless" fashion. For example, our goal has been to collaborate with entities (both public and private) to develop implementations of our technical standard which are appropriate for each entity-- to provide a standard mechanism by which a visually impaired traveler can: go through an intersection to ATM or fare machine; fare machine to bus stop; bus stop to bus; bus to building; building to elevator; elevator to office; office to restroom, etc.

This effort has resulted in substantial success. The 1998 Federal Transportation Equity Act (TEA) specifies (in Section 137, Pedestrians and Bicycles) that “Safety considerations shall include, where appropriate, the installation and maintenance of audible signals and audible signs at cross streets.” This is one more indication of the timeliness and relevance of this research and development program. In San Francisco, Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART), San Francisco Municipal Railway (Muni), and Caltrain are committed to making their transit systems accessible using Talking Signs (one BART/Muni station is already installed as well as a number of Muni light rail platforms). The City Hall, Civic Center Courthouse, New Main Library, Moscone Convention Center, Yerba Buena Park, Yerba Buena Children's Center and other public and private venues are currently installing Talking Signs transmitters (several projects are now complete). They have been installed in downtown San Francisco on a number of bus shelters and modern, self-cleaning public toilets. The San Francisco Foundation has generously provided funds to buy receivers for blind and visually impaired users (distributed through a program with our local Lighthouse for the Blind). The same acceptance has begun in New York, Austin, Santa Barbara, Boston and Baton Rouge. Mitsubishi has recently signed a licensing agreement with Talking Signs and recently installed their first system in Yokohama. The Venice-Mestre (Italy) Railroad Station has installed a pilot project and proposals have been submitted to Hong Kong for the underground. Luminator, the largest US supplier of bus and rail destination signs is offering a Talking Signs module compatible with the industry standard interface used by a number of destination sign manufacturers.

This remote infrared signage system also has positive implications for persons who have developmental disabilities, people who have severe dyslexia, and elderly people who may not have severe visual pathologies, but whose visual limitations contribute to confusion in orientation when traveling. In a collaborative project with The Arc of San Francisco, we are currently evaluating the usefulness of RISS for persons who have developmental disabilities.

| WC Home | Introduction | Methods | Results |
| Focus Group | Discussion | Conclusions | References |