Lankan tsunami or WTC, people tend to live, or die, together
Shankar Vedantam
How the disaster starts does not matter: It could be a plane crashing
into the World Trade Center, it could be the sea receding rapidly ahead
of an advancing tsunami, it could be smoke billowing through a
nightclub. Human beings in New York, Sri Lanka and Rhode Island all do
the same thing in such situations. They turn to each other. They talk.
They hang around, trying to arrive at a shared understanding of what is
happening. When we look back on such events with the benefit of
hindsight, this apparent inactivity can be horrifying.
“Get out now!” we want to scream at those people in the upper stories
of the South Tower of the World Trade Center, as they huddle around
trying to understand what caused an explosion in the North Tower at 8:46
on a Tuesday morning in September. “You only have 16 minutes before your
exit will be cut off,” we want to tell them. “Don’t try to understand
what is happening. Just go.”
“What the sea is doing is not marvelous,” we want to tell those
fishermen in Sri Lanka, as they gather together to discuss the amazing
phenomenon of the receding waters. “You only have a few minutes to get
to higher ground before the tsunami arrives.”
“Please,” we pray, as we watch video of patrons at a Rhode Island
nightclub in 2003 putting their heads together to figure out whether the
pyrotechnic display on stage is just very dramatic or a stunt that is
out of control. “In 60 seconds, it will be too late.”
Experts who study disasters are slowly coming to realize that rather
than try to change human behavior to adapt to building codes and
workplace rules, it may be necessary to adapt technology and rules to
human behavior: In the narrow window between the siren of disaster and
disaster itself, people always want to understand what is happening.
You can see this yourself the next time the fire alarm goes off at
work, school or home. People will look at one another. They will ask
each other: “Is it a drill? Shall we give it 30 seconds to see if it
shuts off on its own? Can I just finish sending this e-mail?”
For all the disaster preparations put in place since the attacks of
Sept. 11, 2001, the behaviour of people confronted with ambiguous new
information remains one of the most serious challenges for disaster
planners.
Computer models assume that people will flow out of a building like
water, emptying through every possible exit. The reality is far
different. People talk. They confer. They go back to their desk.
They try to exit the building the way they came in, rather than
through the nearest door. Building engineers at the World Trade Center
had estimated that escaping people would move at a rate of more than
three feet per second. On Sept. 11, 2001, said Jason Averill, an
engineer at the National Institute for Standards and Technology who
studies human behavior during evacuations, people escaped at one-fifth
that speed.
Although the towers were only one-third to one-half full, the
stairwells were at capacity, he said. Had the buildings been full,
Averill said, about 14,000 people would probably have died.
One study after the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center found that
group size was a significant factor in determining how quickly people
exited the building after a van loaded with explosives went off in an
underground parking lot: Individuals who were part of larger groups,
such as large workplaces, took longer to escape than individuals who
were part of smaller groups.
That is because the larger the group, the greater the effort and time
needed to build a common understanding of the event and a consensus
about a course of action, said sociologist Benigno Aguirre of the
University of Delaware. If a single person in a group does not want to
take an alarm seriously, he or she can impede the escape of the entire
group. The picture of what happened on Sept. 11 is very different from
conventional assumptions about crowd behaviour, in which it is assumed
that people would push each other out of the way to save their own
lives. In actuality, human beings in crisis behave more nobly - and this
could also be their undoing.
People reach out not only to build a shared understanding of the
event but also to help one another. In so doing, they may delay their
own escape. This may be why groups often perish or survive together -
people are unwilling to escape if someone they know and care about is
left behind.
Contrary to the notion of selfish behaviour in crises, Aguirre said,
the accounts of how people fled the World Trade Center building on Sept.
11 reveal only one instance of a man who heard an explosion, laced up
his tennis shoes and ran until he was far away from the building. This
may be why in fire disasters, Aguirre said, entire families often
perish.
“The most important factor for human beings is our affinitive
behaviour,” said Aguirre. “You love your child and wife and parents;
that is what makes you human. In conditions of great danger, many people
continue to do that. ... People will go back into the fire to try to
rescue loved ones.”
- The Washington Post |