Experience with the circulation path as a determinant factor in evacuation exit selection

ABSTRACT Building evacuation can be challenging due to complex environments. A cognitive map is one of the most influential factors leading to different strategies of egress for individuals, yet there is little discussion about how pre-event experience influences individual exit choice. This study explores how pre-event spatial experience influences the evacuation exit choice. We conducted a semi-structured interview with a single evacuation drill involving 70 participants in a shopping center in Bandung, Indonesia. Participants were asked to choose an exit point in an evacuation scenario and were then interviewed about their reasoning. Analysis from the video footage of the evacuation and interview transcriptions showed four pre-event spatial experiences that influenced individual exit choice: habitual path preference, past traverse experience, access to the building, and associative events. Four elements from pre-event spatial experiences from this study are accessibility, familiarity, orientation ability, and social interaction influence exit choice. The findings contribute to the understanding of interaction between visitor behavior and circulation path. They provide insight about how experience forms familiarity as an important aspect in determining evacuation route. Lastly, this paper discusses the behavioral explanations underlying these findings and areas for future work.


Introduction
Disasters can strike at any time and in varying degrees of severity (Fraser 2022). Many studies have been conducted to improve the population's preparedness for hazards, particularly in areas where evacuation procedures are difficult to comprehend (Abdulhalim et al. 2021;Dulebenets et al. 2019). This can be stressful for those who are unprepared as they are vulnerable (Daylamani-Zad, Spyridonis, and Al-Khafaaji 2022;Yongsatianchot and Marsella 2022) or lack evacuation procedure knowledge (Hall et al. 2022). It is critical to provide an effective emergency evacuation scenario because stress can lead to ineffective evacuation and increased casualties (Daylamani-Zad, Spyridonis, and Al-Khafaaji 2022; Yongsatianchot and Marsella 2022).
The selection of an evacuation route is part of the emergency scenario. The majority of studies on evacuation route behavior have been conducted in the context of a fire emergency (Lin et al. 2020b). Studies focus on how the physical such as visual access (Natapov et al. 2022), exit layout (Feng, Duives, and Hoogendoorn 2022;Shi et al. 2022), signage system (Wang et al. 2022), and social environments (Haghani and Sarvi 2017;Lin et al. 2020a;Ma, Yuen, and Lee 2016;Song et al. 2017), as well as individual characteristics (Jeon et al. 2011;Tancogne-Dejean and Laclémence 2016), influence decision making. One important factor influencing route selection is spatial familiarity (Bode and Codling 2013;Chen et al. 2020;M. Kinateder, Comunale, and Warren 2018b;Lovreglio et al. 2022).
Despite the fact that studies indicate that spatial familiarity is important, they rarely discuss the factors that influence spatial familiarity (Fu, Liu, and Zhang 2021;M. Kinateder, Comunale, and Warren 2018b;Sime 1985;Wood 1972). Studies use self-report to indicate familiarity as a cognitive process related to prior experience (Andresen, Chraibi, and Seyfried 2018;Fu, Liu, and Zhang 2021), but it is scarcely discussed in evacuation scenarios. Familiarity was assumed to be the exit point that people had previously used or were aware of prior to the event (Casareale et al. 2017;M. Kinateder, Comunale, and Warren 2018a;Lovreglio et al. 2022;Wang et al. 2022). In cognitive research, spatial familiarity is a complex issue that involves emotion and cognition during interaction with the environment (Demirbas 2001;Robin, Garzon, and Moscovitch 2019;Tancogne-Dejean and Laclémence 2016).
Pre-event experiences influence the decisionmaking of evacuation routes (Abolghasemzadeh 2013;Lovreglio, Ronchi, and Nilsson 2016) by manifesting spatial information as memory (Nadel et al., 2002). Nobre and Stokes (2019) suggest the term "premembering" captures this phenomenon, where memory supplies the essential elements for selective attention to guide perception and performance under time pressure and stress (Ozel 2001). While the information processing of the environment happens in the current task, the memory from a pre-event experience contributes as a contextual medium (Nadel and Payne 2002;Passini 1984) that binds information together. This memory might accumulate as long-term memory, specifically episodic memory (Nadel and Payne 2002), which involves recollecting specific events and situations that come from natural behavioral interactions (Bar 2004;Draschkow and Võ 2016). Thus, it is important to learn from realworld scenarios how the interaction shapes the decision-making.
This relation between the pre-event experiences that supply memory information and spatial familiarity for evacuation exit route selection is scarcely discussed. Understanding how prior-event experience structures spatial familiarity for emergency exit choice will aid in comprehension of simulation of evacuation behavior and for architects in designing spatial experiences that consider the safety of building occupants. As result, this article intends to qualitatively explore the relationship between prior-event experience and spatial memory that influence spatial familiarity for individual evacuation exit choices.

Methods
This study conducted in-depth interviews and evacuation drills with 70 participants (43 females and 27 males, aged 17-26) which refers to a similar prior field study (Andresen, Chraibi, and Seyfried 2018). The participants were visitors from a neighborhood shopping center in Southern Bandung, Indonesia. Using non-random sampling data collection method, data were collected at peak hours on a weekday when most visitors were young people. The building has four stories, but this study conducts the observation of exit choice in the fourth story with the most visited. The data taken was from January 2018 to April 2018. All the participants had previous experience with building, having visited at least once previously. We asked participants to put themselves in an evacuation situation where a fire was on the same floor as their current location, and they were to choose an exit route from  the building. In setting this scenario, we acknowledge that participants did not face any genuine threat that required escape. They hypothesized this particular contextual element as many prior studies in this field have also required of their research participants (e.g., Haghani et al. 2016;Nicolas, Bouzat, and Kuperman 2017;Xudong et al. 2009). We recorded the choice of exit with an action camera during the task and interviewed participants after the task to ensure the spontaneity of answers. We asked the same question to each participant, "Why did you choose this exit?", without emphasizing the matter of prior experience or other issues. Using content analysis to analyze the reasons and video footage, we developed categories based on episodic-like memory test keywords such as "what," "where," and "when" (Figure 1). The terms are widely used in the psychology field to recognize the experience related to the memorized task (Kart-Teke et al. 2006;Samareh and Terzidis n.d.;Sugar and Moser 2019). We also analyzed the setting that results in five exit points with different distances and visibility from starting points.

Coincidence between attribute and exit point
The building has two direct exit points and three alternative exit points on the same floor as the starting point determined for the task. The distances between the starting point and exit points are as follows: P0 to P1 (53 meters), P0 to P2 (40 meters), P0 to P3 (40 meters), P0 to P4 (60 meters), and P0 to P5 (58 meters) ( Table 1). P4 was the farthest point to approach and not visible from the starting point ( Figure 3(b)), while P2 and P3 were not visible but formed the nearest exit points from the starting point ( Figure 3(a)). The three escalators (P1, P2, and P3) were not the appropriate exit points because they led to another route in the building, which would protract the time to exit. While P4 is the emergency stairs located near the main elevator, P5 is the exit leading to the parking area ( Figure 2). The results show that 51.4% of participants selected the point that was not visible, indicating that factors other than visibility influence the selection of the exit  route in a familiar environment (Tableel 1). Based on the interview, we found four attributes that recalled influence the exit selection such as path value (46 participants), confidence (36 participants), traversed experience (22 participants), and visibility (11 participants). There is significant correspondence between attributes and exit points showing that each exit point tends to have different attributes (p = 0.0095) ( Figure 4). People incline to choose P1 because of their traverse experience in relation to their daily habits. The clear visibility of P1 from the start point also attracted more evacuees, even though the length is farther than with the P2 and P3 exits. The choice of P3 as an exit point related mostly to people's confidence, while place value led people to choose P4 and P5. The last exit point, P2, was found to be the least associated with the reasons identified. The correspondence also showed a significant relationship between the attributes associated with an individual's knowledge of alternative exit points. Those familiar with a greater number of alternative exits tended to use path values to choose their exit points in a familiar environment (p = 0.034) (Figures 5). This indicates that the attributes might be related to the individual's cognitive map. Although there is a significant correspondence   between attribute and emergency exit choice, the correspondence with individual characteristics such as gender, visitor frequency, and familiarity was insignificant, which means that the choice attribute is not solely relevant to individual characteristics

Four main categories of the pre-event experience
Using the episodic memory keyword (Figure 1), we found four main categories of the pre-event experience that participants recall in choosing an exit point: accessibility, familiarity, orientation ability, and social interaction ( Table 2). As indicated in Table 2, most of the participants' experience related to accessibility in a daily or regular situation, leading to familiarity with the exit choice.
(1) Accessibility Accessibility in daily situations plays an important role in emergency exit choice. We found two types of accessibility experience based on time interaction: repetitive access, which refers to building accessibility, vertical accessibility, and path preference, and non-repetitive access, which relates to participant traverse experience in small numbers. Most of the interactions with building elements recalled by participants in their evacuation exit choice concerned vertical access, such as escalators and elevators. The second is path preference in a daily situation. In this instance, the process led participants to use P3 and P5 based on knowledge of path density and path end which they obtain during the prior experience. Even though the participants had no direct visual access to these exit points from the start point, they were confident in their choice. The third type is the traverse experience, which led participants to use P4 most. Although they had used this exit only once prior to the data collection, participants felt safe and assured about the function. The last accessibility type is the building access experience that led participants to use the same point of entry/exit in which they came to the building.
(2) Familiarity Pre-event experience affords familiarity with the exit points. There are three types of familiarity statements from participants in this study: familiar, unfamiliar, and non-stated. Familiarity offers people assurance and confidence to solve the task with the information they already possess. For example, in this case, P1 (main escalator) is the most familiar among the exit choices because participants often use this building element and see it daily. People who use the emergency stairs (P4) tended not to state whether they were familiar or unfamiliar with this building element, which indicates another aspect that influences the decision. Besides knowing the emergency stairs location, we suggest that the assurance of procedural evacuation knowledge acted as a medium in determining the exit decision. In this case, most participants did not feel familiar with the procedure of using emergency stairs. In particular, they had received information from movies and/or the news that was uncomprehensive and unrealistic to the emergency scenario as stated by R1 and R19. They were also unaware of the signage related to evacuation during their interaction with the environment. Thus, it is crucial to consider this aspect in evacuation building design. " . . . I often see it from the news . . . an emergency exit for an emergency . . . " (R1) " . . . like in the movie, if you are panic because. like a fire or something.you should through the emergency stairs . . . " (R19) (

3) Social Interaction
The findings also revealed that participants obtained clues from the physical setting and through social interaction. (4) Orientation Ability This study found that some participants who negatively judged their orientation capabilities tended to choose the most visible exit. All participants that experienced initial difficulties in understanding the environment chose exit point P1 (main escalator). The self-perception of having difficulties prevented them from exploring or recalling other strategies, so they chose the most accessible exit point to perceive as stated by R6 and R56. Kuligowski (2011) refers to the phenomenon as "satisficing", a strategy of choosing what is seen as a good option rather than seeking the optimal one. This occurs a person when they experience a high level of uncertainty in evacuation situations. " . . . I've been here many times but don't remember. I don't know, it's a bit of a twist, the location of escalator . . . " (R6) " . . . I usually got confused (in this building) . . . " (R56)

Cluster of pre-event experiences and the exit choice
This study found significant correspondence between pre-event interaction and exit choice (p = 0. 071). Using cluster analysis, we found four types of pre-event experiences influence the exit choice: habitual path preference in a daily situation, past traverse experience, building access in a daily situation, and associative events ( Figure 6).
(1) Habitual path preference in the daily context In this case, most people refer to their habitual path preference in a daily context, especially in relation to vertical access in the building, such as the use of escalators and elevators. The main escalator (P1), located in the center of the building, encourages people to use it frequently. Aside from its straightforward visual access, the arrangement of stores and the circulation pattern of the floorplan direct movement within the broader space. Thus, combining a clear pattern of circulation space and reachable visual access to the exit point stimulates the frequent use of P1 in daily situations and forms a habitual memory of exit choice, prompting people to use it in evacuation. People who frequently used P3 (Mediterranean escalator) refer to areas of exit quality, such as vacant or shorter traverse time.
Even though the exit cannot be seen from the start point, people infer quality based on their experience with the exit, which manifested as path value. Path value is more accessible to recall as information in decision-making processes than a complete cognitive map because it associates with personal experience.
(2) Past traverse experience of emergency stairs People who used the emergency stairs (P4) relied on their path value of safety. Even though they rarely traversed it (unfamiliar), the perception of safety is firmly associated with P4. This perhaps relates to the participants' familiarity with evacuation procedures and the location of the emergency stairs (P4). The location of P4, which is next to the elevator as one of the main vertical access points, imparts repeated visual exposure (if subconsciously) to people who use the elevator. By contrast, the traverse experience provides people with functional information associated with the stairs (P4). Nevertheless, some participants aware of the emergency stairs (P4) location were still unsure (3) Building access in daily situation The location of building access plays an essential role in people's evacuation exit choice as an orientation base. The mechanism of self-orienting related to a specific location is known as path integration (Golledge 1999;Riecke, Van Veen, and Bülthoff 2002), where people process information based on integrating the perceived velocity or acceleration over time to determine the current position and orientation concerning some starting point. In this case, some people refer to the building access, such as the parking entrance and main entrance. It is perhaps related to familiarity with the entrance and the inability to form a complete cognitive map. Thus the placement of the building entrance must consider this possibility in evacuation (Kurdi et al. 2018).
(4) Associative events Some people used associative events to choose an evacuation exit point. This concept relates to subjectively individual spatial learning. Using associative events that involve emotion and personal experience help to form memory information that is easy to recall in evacuation scenarios. In this instance, some people associate the exit point with specific activities relating to friends or family. As R14 said: " . . . it was the escalator that I like to use when I was with my housemates," or as R20 said: " . . . At that time, my brother picked me up from school and asked me to go through there." Thus, it is essential to design an evacuation path or circulation path that enables social interaction rather than a secluded exit point.

Discussion
This study found that pre-event experience is essential in generating familiarity with an exit choice. People chose more familiar exit points over the most visible or nearest exit points. The results are in line with Chen et al. (2020) and (Sime 1985), who suggests that people tend to choose the exit they frequently use to escape. People in a known environment tend to choose familiar exit points for two main reasons. First, this process relates to exit route attributes such as path value and visibility. Second, it relates to internal factors such as confidence and traverse experience. This likely relates to our natural neurocognitive capacity; specifically, the part of the brain called the hippocampus, which forms and stores the context of spatial learning (episodic memory) (Nadel and Payne 2002). This context relates to personal experience, which associates context with the environment and stores it as a memory landmark. The process involves the subject becoming part of the information process (i.e., egocentric-based); thus, it is easier to access than cognitive map learning (i.e., allocentric-based) in emergency scenarios (M. T. Kinateder et al. 2015). This finding confirms the use of egocentric strategies (Lin, Cao, and Li 2020) as a mediating process on how prior spatial knowledge shortens the hesitation time during emergencies. This study supports Nadel and Payne (2002) contention that exit selection, as part of the wayfinding task, employs a similar episodic memory retrieval mechanism. According to (Andresen, Chraibi, and Seyfried 2018), when choosing evacuation exits, people do not use all of their spatial knowledge. Under evacuation stress, decision-making relies on selective information because human information processing capacity is limited (Jaśko et al. 2015). In this case, most people rely on route knowledge, particularly firstperson perspective or egocentric-based knowledge. This information includes not only the location but also the path value. We suggest that the four attributes are part of memory information from previous interactions with the environment involving individual cognitive and emotional states (Ozel 2001). The combination of cognitive and emotional aspects during a similar pre-event experience generates path value, which is easily recalled during evacuation. This is consistent with Kobes et al. (2010) who stated that knowledge and experience are components of the lived context that influence human fire response performance. According to (Almejmaj, Skorinko, and Meacham 2017), there is also a significant relationship between culture and pre-event experience background.
Exposure to the available exits is essential to establishing spatial familiarity. .  also propose that repeated exposure to an environment reduces mental stress, travel time, and distance significantly. Pre-event experiences consist of repetitive and nonrepetitive exposure, depending on their frequency. The repeated exposure to physical environments produces habitual and familiar memory information. Because of the increased use of caudate-based stimulus-response strategies that integrate spatial information with motor behavior formulation (Kim et al. 2001;Schwabe et al. 2008Schwabe et al. , 2007, the habitual memory is typically retrieved unconsciously. This occurs with those who choose the exit route without indicating their familiarity. The repetitive exposure, whether visually or through traversal action, occurs frequently on the main circulation paths of a building, particularly at the connections between the vertical access points, such as elevators and escalators, and the building entrance. The non-repetitive exposure occurs in alternative circulation spaces, such as emergency stairways or other circulation paths that are infrequently utilized and generate unfamiliar information. Some individuals choose the unfamiliar exit option despite their lack of familiarity with it. This is due to their certainty regarding the function and subjective perception of the option as containing pertinent data (Tong and Bode 2022). It appears that pre-event experience not only forms a cognitive map and path value but also places trust in spatial information (Figure 7), as memory information that is infrequently accessed appears to be inaccurate and biased (Kahneman et al. 1982;Kinsey et al. 2019). This explains why people choose an exit based on their daily habits rather than the closest or least crowded one (Benthorn and Frantzich 1996;Chen et al. 2020).

Conclusion and study limitations
This study suggests that pre-event experience, especially activity in circulation space, has an essential role in forming familiarity with evacuation exit points. People tend to choose familiar exit points rather than those that are nearest or visible when placed in a familiar environment. We argue that frequent visitation per se does not indicate the degree of familiarity, as many studies assume would lead to an actual emergency exit. We found four main categories, nine subcategories, and 30 codes of pre-event spatial experience that were recalled by participants when choosing an evacuation exit. Individual attributes such as place value, confidence, traverse experience, and visibility influence decision-making processes and show the critical rule of egocentric-based spatial learning.
We propose four pre-event experiences that shape exit choice familiarity: habitual path preference in daily context, past traverse experience of emergency stair, access to the building in daily situation, and associative event from social interaction. These preevent experiences formed bodies of personal spatial knowledge and became a repository of solutions that were easier to recall than the cognitive map approach. Thus, in planning evacuation routes, it is necessary to consider the design of circulation paths in buildings, especially those connected to accessibility points in the building and its internally active areas. People have different perceptions and reactions to solving evacuation tasks, especially in contexts where evacuation drills and procedures are not common. We found that the perception of evacuation task combined with spatial knowledge becomes a filtration mechanism for decision-making processes during an emergency scenario. This explains why most people tend to follow others rather than following the course they deem more suitable (leaderfollower rule). Even though the evacuees may be in a familiar environment, most people are unfamiliar with evacuation tasks.
In presenting these findings, we acknowledge some limitations dan need further research, such as: • This study does not use real stress stimuli like an actual fire situation. Further study can combine these findings into a model and simulation such as virtual reality to generate a more realistic scenario. • As this study uses a single case study involving a building with a medium level of configuration complexity in a familiar environment, future research would benefit from using more complex building configurations and functions. • Also, as the study has focused on young participants, further study would benefit from exploring a broader set of factors in the participant group including age, shopping behavior, and sociocultural difference.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).