Dr. Y.

Mubarak

Panic Behavior

The media tends to show that fire and panic are

closely linked.
Over the past 30 years more and more studies
have been done regarding panic.
What this has shown is that in most cases panic
did not occur.

Dr. Y. Mubarak

Panic Behavior
An early definition of panic was:
A sudden and excessive feeling of alarm or fear
usually affecting a body of persons, originating
in some real or supposed danger, vaguely
apprehended, and leading to extravagant and
injudicious efforts to secure safety.
A new definition for panic is:
A fear-induced flight behavior which is non
rational, nonadaptive, and nonsocial, which
serves to reduce the escape possibilities of the
group as a whole.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

Panic Behavior
The four elements of panic are:
1. A hope for escape, even with closing escape
routes.
2. Contagious behavior, especially if keynoted by
leaders of the group affected by the fire.
3. Aggressive concern by the individual for his
or her own safety, as opposed to concern for
others in the same fire.
4. Irrational, illogical response to the fire situation
Dr. Y. Mubarak

Panic Behavior
Studies show that one or more of these elements
were missing in most fire evacuations:
There is usually no evidence of panic when
there is no hope of escape.
Contagious behavior is very common in
emergencies or ambiguous situations simply
because people tend to follow the leader in
times of stress or when they need reassurance
about the right thing to do.
Panic occurs in those instances where an
individual does not follow the actions of the
group.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

Panic Behavior
People often help others - even at great
personal risk.
Escape strategies that are unsuccessful are
not necessarily irrational or illogical.
There was no panic behavior among the 164
victims of the Beverly Hills Supper Club fire

Dr. Y. Mubarak

MAKING SENSE OF HUMAN

BEHAVIOR DURING FIRES
How people react during a fire is based on a
complex pattern of human behavior. This can
be grouped together in a process called
Decision Process of the Individuals.
People use six basic techniques to decide what
to do in an emergency situation. These are
recognition, validation, definition, evaluation,
commitment, and reassessment.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

Recognition
The recognition process happens when the
individual perceives cues that indicate a threat
of fire.
These cue may be ambiguous and not always
indicative of a severe fire. This is where
something does not feel right to the person.
The threat is unrecognized until flame, heat,
or smoke are seen.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

Validation
The validation process consists of attempts by
the individual to determine the seriousness of
the threat cues.
Question such as Do we evacuate the
building? or Do you smell smoke?

Dr. Y. Mubarak

Definition
The definition process basically consists of an
attempt by the individual to relate information
concerning the threat to some certain variable,
such as the qualitative nature of the threat, the
magnitude of deprivation of the threat, and the
time context.
In this part the person will determine a course of
action on How much smoke do we see or
How much heat do we feel.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

10

Evaluation
The evaluation process can be described as the
cognitive and psychological activities required for
the individual to respond to the threat.
The individuals ability to reduce their stress levels
became an essential psychological factor.
In this process the threat created by the fire will
determine the decision of whether to fight the fire
or take flight.
Because of the speed at which the fire grows and
intensifies, the time frame for this evaluation is
usually completed in a few seconds.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

11

Commitment
This part of the process consists of
mechanisms the individual will use to initiate
the behavioral activity required to fulfill the
defense plan that was developed in the
evaluation process.

Dr. Y. Mubarak

12

Reassessment
This is the most stressful of the processes for
the individual because the last process has
failed.
As successive failures are encountered the
individual will become more frustrated.
At this point the possibility of injury and risk
increase with a greater activity level and with
less probability of success.
At this point decisions become less rational.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

13

OTHER ACTIONS AFFECTING

PEOPLES REACTION TO FIRE
AVOIDANCE
A person can feel that they protect themselves,
from a psychological standpoint, denying
unpleasant situations.
This is a form of denial that is common in early
stages of a fire.
Avoidance is one of the reasons that many people
delay their reaction to a fire, by treating the alarm
as a false alarm.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

14

COMMITMENT
Most persons are committed to what they are
doing at the time, work projects, leisure activities,
personal projects, etc.
When a person picks up cues of a fire they will
continue working despite the danger warnings.
People will finish up what they are doing and
then evacuate the danger area, even though the
alarm has sounded.
At other times a person may see the warning
signal that a fire alarm is occurring, but still enter
the building as if nothing is wrong.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

15

AFFILIATION
People are social animals, and tend to act as a
group, whether they know the people or not.
Most people leave together in a danger situation,
and the speed of the evacuation is usually based
on the speed of the slowest member.
This affiliation explains why parents will not
leave without their children, and why people will
wait for co-workers and even strangers.

Dr. Y. Mubarak

16

ROLE
The role or status of someone will determine
how they will react in a fire situation.
Someone unfamiliar with a building or facility,
i.e., a visitor, may take more time to react to a
fire threat than someone who works or lives
there.
People will tend to turn to someone in the
know, such as a supervisor, security personnel,
or firefighter for information on what to do next
in the emergency.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

17

LIFE SAFETY STRATEGIES

Ideally, building design considers the risk factors
that are associated with occupants and fires, and
includes the safety features that might mitigate
the risks.
Some of the strategies that are used to limit these
risks are:

1. Fire prevention,
2. Fire management,
3. Occupant management.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

18

FIRE PREVENTION
If there is no fire then there is no harm from it.
Fire prevention methods have the potential to
eliminate fire safety measures. But, since fire
prevention is not totally effective it can not be
relied on as the sole answer to fire control.
Fire prevention relates to the control of heat
sources and their coming in contact with burnable
fuels.
Fire prevention also deals with the major cause
fires - humans.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

19

FIRE MANAGEMENT
Since we cannot control all ignitions, we must
consider the management of the fires.
This strategy attempts to control the rate of
production of smoke and heat by controlling the
combustion process by manual or automatic
suppression, and to control the products of
combustion through ventilation and/or
containment.
The objective of fire management is to reduce
the risks associated with fire growth, and to
reduce fire and smoke spread.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

20

OCCUPANT MANAGEMENT
This is the most complex of the strategies,
because we are dealing with people.
Occupant management involves undertaking
emergency action appropriate to the expected fire
development and to the characteristics of the
occupants.
To initiate occupant management there must first
be detection and alerting activities.
Dr. Y. Mubarak

21

OCCUPANT MANAGEMENT
The functions performed by this equipment
involves evacuation, refuge or rescue.
Evacuation is the most common approach for
occupants that are alert and mobile.
Areas of refuge from fire and smoke are
employed to move occupants in the building to
safe areas to await emergency personnel.

Dr. Y. Mubarak

22