Studi Tingkat Kepentingan Mahasiswa Pada Jalur Pedestrian Kampus

Haris Murwadi


Ativitas mahasiswa di lingkungan kampus cenderung beragam.  Keragaman aktivitas tersebut membuat mereka sering berpindah dari satu bangunan ke bangunan lainnya. Akomodasi perpindahan mahasiswa menggunakan jalur pedestrian yang tersedia di lingkungan kampus. mahasiswa terhadap jalur pedestrian di kampus mereka. Penelitian mengetahui tingkat kepentingan mahasiswa terhadap jalur pedestrian di kampus mereka serta untuk mengetahui perbedaan tingkat kepentingan mahasiswa terhadap jalur pedestrian di kampus mereka. Pengumpulan data kuantitatif dilakukan melalui kuesioner tertutup secara online. Responden merupakan mahasiswa yang tersebar pada tiga universitas terpilih. Pengumpulan data dilakukan berdasarkan sebaran fakultas pada setiap universitas. Penelitian ini menemukan bahwa profil yang memiliki perbedaan tingkat kepentingan adalah gender dan batch. Perbedaan profil Gender terhadap variabel adequacy of light at night sedangkan perbedaan profil batch terhadap variabel safe from traffic accident. Mahasiswa Polinela merupakan mahasiswa yang memiliki persepsi paling tinggi terhadap tingkat kepentingan pada kedua faktor. Artinya, perhatian pada variabel ini merupakan hal serius khususnya pada kampus Polinela. Temuan lainnya adalah aktivitas mahasiswa yang memiliki perbedaan tingkat kepentingan adalah duration of daily activity on campus, return frequency, dan walking frequency.




Studi; tingkat kepentingan; mahasiswa; jalur pedestrian

Full Text:



Arshad, A. K., Bahari, N. I., Hashim, W., & Abdul Halim, A. G. (2016). Gender Differences in Pedestrian Perception and Satisfaction on the Walkability of Kuala Lumpur City Center. MATEC Web of Conferences, 47(July), 03003 1-4.

Asadi-Shekari, Z., Moeinaddini, M., & Zaly Shah, M. (2014). A pedestrian level of service method for evaluating and promoting walking facilities on campus streets. Land Use Policy, 38, 175–193.

Asadi-Shekari, Z., Moeinaddini, M., & Zaly Shah, M. (2015). Pedestrian safety index for evaluating street facilities in urban areas. Safety Science, 74, 1–14.

Erna, W., Antariksa, Surjono, & Amin, S. L. (2016). Convenience Component of Walkability in Malang City Case Study the Street Corridors Around City Squares. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 227, 587–592.

Ferrer, S., Ruiz, T., & Mars, L. (2015). A qualitative study on the role of the built environment for short walking trips. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 33(August), 141–160.

Florez, J., & Muniz, J. (2014). Pedestrian quality of service : Lessons from Maracanã Stadium. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 160(Cit), 130–139.

Ghani Abdul, N., Shimizu, T., & Mokhtar, S. (2015). Assessment of Pedestrian Facilities in Malacca World Heritage Site, Malaysia using P-Index Method. Journal of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, 11, pp 1535-1554. Retrieved from

H. Tuydes-Yaman, O. Altintasi, P. Karatas. (2014). Evaluating Pedestrian Level of Service at Middle East Technical University ( METU ) Campus. In Conference: ACE2014 (pp. 1–6).

Iamtrakul, P., & Zhang, J. (2014). Measuring pedestrians’ satisfaction of urban environment under transit oriented development (TOD): A case study of Bangkok Metropolitan, Thailand. Lowland Technology International, 16(2), 125–134.

Kadali, B. R., & Vedagiri, P. (2015). Evaluation of pedestrian crosswalk level of service (LOS) in perspective of type of land-use. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 73, 113–124.

Kang, L., Xiong, Y., & Mannering, F. L. (2013). Statistical analysis of pedestrian perceptions of sidewalk level of service in the presence of bicycles. Transportation Research Part A, 53, 10–21.

Kim, S., Park, S., & Lee, J. S. (2014). Meso- or micro-scale? Environmental factors influencing pedestrian satisfaction. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 30, 10–20.

Lefrandt, L., Sulistio, H., & Wicaksono, A. (2016). Model Movement Pedestrian Satisfaction in Manado Using Structural Equation Modeling. Journal of Applied Environmental and Biological Sciences, 6(1), 31–37.

Luis M. Martínez, A. P. B. (2014). Understanding the Factors that Influence Pedestrian Environment Quality. Transportation Research Board 93rd Annual Meeting, 490(January 2014), 16.

Martokusumo, W., Kusuma, H. E., & Octaviana, S. (2013). Evaluation of Walkability on Pedestrian Sidewalk in Bandung. In The Second Planocosmo Conference (pp. 1–11).

Mateo-Babiano, I. (2016). Pedestrian’s needs matters: Examining Manila’s walking environment. Transport Policy, 45(January), 107–115.

Moura, F., Cambra, P., & Gonçalves, A. B. (2017). Measuring walkability for distinct pedestrian groups with a participatory assessment method: A case study in Lisbon. Landscape and Urban Planning, 157, 282–296.

Moura, F., Paulo, C., & Gonçalves, A. (2014). Pedestrian Accessibility and Attractiveness Assessment Tool when planning for Walkability. CITTA 7th Annual Conference & COST TU1002 Final Conference: BRIDGING THE IMPLEMENTATION GAP OF ACCESSIBILITY INSTRUMENTS AND PLANNING SUPPORT SYSTEMS, 18.

Nuzir, F. A., & Dewancker, B. (2015). Re-Finding PL . AC . E . for Walking : Assessment of Key-Elements Using Questionnaire. Current Urban Studies, (December), 267–285.

Pratiwi, A. R., Zhao, S., & Mi, X. (2015). Quantifying the relationship between visitor satisfaction and perceived accessibility to pedestrian spaces on festival days. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 4(4), 285–295.

Rahimiashtiani, Z., & Ujang, N. (2013). Pedestrian Satisfaction with Aesthetic, Attractiveness and Pleasurability: Evaluating the Walkability of Chaharaghabbasi Street in Isfahan, Iran. Alam Cipta, 6(2), 13–22.

Ranasinghe, G., Amarawickrama, S., Rathnayake, R., Randeniya, T., & Rathnasiri, S. (2015). A Model for Assessing the Level of Walkability in Urban Neighborhoods in Sri Lanka. International Journal of Built Environment and Sustainability, 2(4), 292–300.

Sotoude, H., Ziari, K., & Gharakhlo, M. (2015). Evaluation of Satisfaction of Pedestrian Safety to Vehicles in Urban Environment , Case Study : Old Context of Marvdasht City. Current World Environment, 10(1), 268–275.

Turk, Y. A., Sen, B., & Ozyavuz, A. (2015). Students Exploration On Campus Legibility. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 197(February), 339–347.

Zainol, R., Ahmad, F., Nordin, N. A., & Aripin, A. W. . (2014). Evaluation of users’ satisfaction on pedestrian facilities using pair-wise comparison approach. IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 12175, 1–6.

Zakaria, J., & Ujang, N. (2015). Comfort of Walking in the City Center of Kuala Lumpur. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 170(January 2015), 642–652.

Zhou, J., Guo, Y., Dong, S., Zhao, L., & Yang, R. (2016). Structural Equation Modeling for Pedestrians’ Perception in Integrated Transport Hubs. Procedia Engineering, 137, 817–826.


  • There are currently no refbacks.