Factors through Which Human Behaviour Affects the Initiation and Development of Fire - Literature review Example

Introduction People react very differently to emergency situations. This reactions or behaviour is normally affected by various factors. They include the age, physical setting, prior training and ones health among other factors. This paper looks at factors through which human behaviour affects the initiation and development of fire. This paper discusses factors which can be classified as relevant to the individual. It also discusses factors relevant to groups and dimensions that come together when families are assembled together at a fire scene. The paper is generally focused on the role of human behaviour in initiating, accelerating and even inhibiting the spread of fire during fire outbreak. (Andreassi, 2006) Factors relevant to the individual People react differently during a fire outbreak. Some people may start looking for their loved ones first before attempting to evacuate the building. Others think of their lives first and make attempts of escaping. There are still other people that think of their property and try all that is at their disposal to salvage their valuables. (Betsch and Haberstroh, 2005) Another group of individuals make efforts to stop the fire first before they start evacuating. There are various factors that make people to behave the way they do during fire disasters. This includes prior education on how to behave during fire outbreaks. People who have undergone some form of training on steps to take during fire outbreaks tend to be composed, think of the safest way of escape and start evacuating the premises. (Betsch and Haberstroh, 2005) According to Christensen, (2007) people who have ever escaped fire disasters always react very first by trying to get to safety. The role of the individual also plays a great role in the behaviour that they depict during such incidences. For instance, mothers most often than not try to gather their children first before starting to evacuate. This is more so when the children are still very young. People who have never been in a fire outbreak tend to be very confused and take steps that can be classified to be unwise. (Christensen, 2007) Age is also a factor that highly affects the way people behave during fire outbreaks. Very young children tend to be confused when fire starts out and end up being the most affected by having burns. Mature people tend to act more wisely most probably due to the knowledge they have accrued over the years. Very old people also tend to behave in unwise ways and are less mobile making them very vulnerable to injuries and fatalities during fire disasters. Larger people tend to be slow when caught up in fires. This is due to their weight that makes them highly immobile. This is unlike slender people who tend to be swifter and evacuate from fire scenes faster than people with a high body mass. Research however shows that larger people can easily tolerate large quantities of toxic fumes than smaller ones. (Griffin, 2009) According to Paul, the health of individuals play a major role in their behaviour during fires. Mentally retarded people show a lot of confusion and are prone to taking very dangerous steps are compared to healthy people. The activities that individuals were carrying out when fire occurred can also determine the way they react. Individuals who were asleep during a fire incident tend to show a lot of confusion than those who were awake and carrying out various tasks. Alcohol can make individuals to downplay the seriousness of fire leading to deaths or serious injuries. Medication and drugs can also increase the chances of unreasonable behaviour hence injuries and deaths. (John, 2006) Research has shown that there are various steps of decision making that individuals make during fire incidences. They include recognition process. This is where fire cues are perceived. At this stage the individual does not clearly see the threat but generally feels something is amiss. There is then the validation process that includes efforts by individuals to analyse the seriousness of the situation. An individual may ask other occupants whether they smell any smoke. Next is the definition process that entails individuals’ qualitative analysis of the threat’s magnitude. Individuals ask questions concerning the amount of smoke visible or heat felt. After definition is the evaluation process. This process involves the use of psychological and cognitive aspects of individuals. At this stage, individuals are forced to ascertain whether they need to evacuate the affected building or start putting off the fire. The evaluation process takes a very short time like few seconds. (Powell and Thorne, 2003) There is then the commitment process that has to do with finding mechanisms to implement the decision made in the evaluation stage. If the decision was to fight the fire, then the decision on the means to do this has to be made. There is finally the reassessment process. This process is known to be quite stressful due to failure of previous steps taken. There is a lot of frustration with multiple failures and high chances of injuries during this process. Research shows that most people tend to make irrational decisions at this process. (Rasbash, 2004) Factors relevant to groups and dimensions evident when family members are assembled Research has shown that whenever group(s) of people is in a building when fire outbreak occurs, they tend to affect individuals’ behaviour and decisions on steps to take. People tend to unite when caught up in a fire disaster and try to make decisions collectively. This has been evident even in cases where the people were not familiar to each other or were in conflict. Individuals are sometimes forced to follow suit of a collective decision without much reasoning. In a job situation, employees may run to the supervisor or manager and ask directions on steps to be taken. This also depends on the magnitude of the fire and the initial perception of the fire. A loud bang followed by smoke may elicit a different reaction from a group of employees. Research also shows that people tend to finish up their activities first before thinking of evacuation. This is quite evident in a working environment where employees are busy and may have tasks to accomplish within a given time frame. (Sinha, 2005) Visitors in a building such as customers in a hotel turn to those familiar with the premises for direction. In this case they may run to the hotel staffs. When family members are in a building, they tend to look out for each other first before evacuation. Mothers and fathers tend to show a lot of efforts trying to gather their children before they think of evacuation. In case fire occurs when children are home alone, the older ones take responsibility of gathering or rescuing the younger ones. Impact of physical setting Research carried out by Smith, (2009) shows that different physical settings have different effects on people’s behaviour during fire disasters. The nature of building always has effects on actions taken by people within premises. A thorough analysis shows that fires high rise buildings tend to make people very scared and confused on the actions that they have to take as compared to non storey buildings. People in storey buildings may have limited escape routes. (Smith, 2009) The fact that the escape routes may not be so accessible makes people to try to use other channels for escaping. This includes windows and large ventilation spaces. On many fire incidences, people on the third and even fourth floors attempt to jump off the buildings through windows. This is more so when the fire starts on the ground floors. When fire occurs in non storey buildings, occupants are far more relaxed than in high rise buildings. This is because they can see exit routes and know that they can easily get out to safety. Research also shows that it is quite technical to rescue people in high rise buildings with more than six floors. Many deaths are usually reported during fire disasters in high rise buildings as compared to non storey buildings. (Smith, 2009) Buildings that have fire exit signs, fire alarms, fire and smoke extinguishers tend to make people composed to an extent. This is because they feel proper mechanisms have been put in place that can help them get to safety. When fire exit signs are placed in strategic places, they help people to make wise decisions during fire outbreaks. Buildings that have information posters on steps to take in case of fire tend to have minimal injuries and deaths among occupants. This is considering the fact that this information is relayed helps occupants to make wise decisions during fire outbreaks. Research also indicates that fire assembly points are very essential in buildings. They help in ensuring that everybody has been evacuated from the premises. (Watts, 2003) These points have to be very clear, visible and accessible by all people within different areas of buildings. They are quite essential in helping to take note of people who may still be in the premises. This is quite workable in a working environment. It has been note that buildings that have exterior stairs and doors make it easier for people to evacuate a building during fire outbreaks. This is unlike buildings that only have single stairs and one main door. Space in a building is also a factor that affects human behaviour during fire outbreaks. This includes the space of exit doors and even the space in different rooms. Research has shown that wide exit doors make people to be more relaxed and move out while composed. Buildings with small exit doors make people to rush and squeeze trying to get outside. This leads to multiple injuries and deaths as some people are trampled on in the process. (Watts, 2003) Impact of characteristics of fire There are various hazards that are produced from fire. This normally affects the behaviour of people within the premises. Temperature from fire is one of the factors. People feel uncomfortable with temperatures of approximately 122 degrees. At this temperature, many people try to look out for exit doors to start evacuating the building. People are however incapacitated by temperatures of 150 degrees F. They may not be very comfortable to freely move around the building to look for areas for exit. Temperatures of 125 and above can cause death of people in the premises. Fire temperatures of approximately 260 degrees make it very hard for people within the building to breath through their noses and 300 degrees F, they cannot breathe through the mouth. At temperatures above three hundred degrees, research shows that it is very difficult for occupants in a building to escape. Heat is also a factor that affects human behaviour during fire outbreaks. Heat of more than 2.5 kW per metres squared results in burns and pain that is quite severe. Smoke is normally released from fire. Whenever fire occurs in an enclosed environment, it is very easy for smoke to build up. The smoke usually has hazardous effects on the people in the building. Smoke is known to reduce people’s visibility. This results in people moving all over the building trying to find the exit doors. Smoke also causes a lot of irritation in people’s eyes. This increases their stress levels since at this time occupants want to see clearly so as to evacuate the building. (Betsch and Haberstroh, 2005) Another fire factor that affects people’s behaviour is about depletion of oxygen. Research shows that a drop in oxygen levels in the atmosphere results in hazardous effects on people. This includes effects that are physiological in nature. Reduced oxygen is known to increase people’s respiratory rate, causes fatigue, dizziness, headache, unconsciousness and finally death. Fire is known to produce harmful gases such as carbon monoxide that highly affect people. This includes causing dizziness among other effects that make people to be confused on the steps that they need to take during evacuation. Critique of incident Kader Industrial Toy Factory, Bangkok, Thailand; 10/5/1993 The Toy factory was made up of three principle buildings packed with hundreds of workers when a fire broke out. There were no alarms nor extinguishers present. The casualties reached 200 deaths and up to 500 injured. Such bad work environments with minimal if any safety precautions are common of large multinational companies around the globe. This factory was located in the out skirts of Bangkok, and most of the work force was of the local and rural cheap labours. The total number of buildings making up the factory was four, 4 storey buildings, each of about 70 x 30 metres. The first a second floor had 500 people each working on packing goods, and sewing respectively. The space was very crowded, and walkways were packed with items for storage, and fire exits locked. The top floor alone had up to 800 workers. (Betsch and Haberstroh, 2005) Since there were no alarm system, when the fire occurred at around 4:30 pm the workers did not evacuate the area, but instead remained at their positions. The flames rapidly spread across the building and toxic smoke emerged and thickened at a fast speed feeding on the consumed synthetic fibres. Some of the employees tried to escape through jumping of the top floor, others were found dead gathered at the locked fire exits, suffocated from the inhalation of the toxic fumes. The rescue teams were also very late to arrive at the scene, the fire crew took more than an hour and the ambulance took another 4 hours to arrive. (Watts, 2003) Consequently the reason of the fire was blamed on a worker dropping a cigarette, others were made to executives of the Kader Corporation were accused of negligence in modify the factories design. This case clearly indicates how physical building affects people’s behaviour during fire incidences. Lack of fire alarms, extinguishers, space, locked fire exits resulted in multiple deaths that could be avoided. Smoke from the fire also contributed to the deaths and injuries of the workers. The environment contributed to the behaviour of the employees. If fire exit doors were open, those who jumped off the building would not have taken such steps. (Andreassi, 2006) Conclusion People react differently to fire outbreaks. There are various factors that contribute to this. They include age, prior training and individual’s health. Decision making process involves recognition, validation, definition, evaluation, commitment and reassessment process. When people are in groups they tend to influence each others’ behaviour during fire incidences. Physical setting also affects the way people react to fire outbreak. There is more fear among people in storey buildings than non storey ones. Buildings with fire exits, fire extinguishers exterior stairways make people to be more composed during fire disasters. Fire usually releases smoke, toxic gases, high temperatures that make people dizzy, cause irritation and even result in unconsciousness. Reference: Andreassi, L. (2006): Psychophysiology: Human Behaviour & Physiological Response, Washington; Routledge Betsch, T and Haberstroh, S (2005): The Routines of Dec. Making, Washington; Routledge Christensen, K. (2007): The built environment, evacuations, and individuals with disabilities: a guiding framework for disaster policy and preparation. Journal of Disability Policy Studies, 17; 249-254 Griffin, J. (2009): Human behaviour and fire; retrieved from; http://www.nfpa.org; accessed on 15th Jan 2010 John, L. (2006): Scientific Protocols for Fire Investigation; New York; Prentice Press Powell, P. and Thorne, K (2003): Human Behaviour in Fire Emergencies; Pennsylvania; National Fire Protection Association Rasbash, D. (2004): Evaluation of Fire Safety; John Wiley; London Sinha, R (2005): Impact of Experience on Dec. Making on Emergency Situation; retrieved from; http://epubl.luth.se/1402-1781/2005/15/LTU-CDUPP-0515; accessed on 14th Jan 2010 Smith, R. (2009): Human behaviour and fire; retried from; http://www.ifsta.org; accessed on 14th Jan 2010 Watts, J. (2003): Fundamentals of Fire Safe Building Design; Fire Protection Handbook; 19th Ed; Vol. I, NFPA; Quincy MA; p. 2-37 to 2-49 Read More