Assessing Students’ Utilization of University Footbridges in Amman City: Motivating Factors and Obstacles in an Urban Setting

Abstract

The use of pedestrian footbridges plays a critical role in urban mobility, particularly in university areas with high pedestrian traffic. Despite its importance, footbridge utilization often remains suboptimal due to various influencing factors that are not well understood. This study aims to identify and analyze the factors affecting footbridge utilization among university students in Amman City. By surveying students from four universities—Islamic Sciences University (ISUF), Balqa Applied University (BAUF), and two branches of Jordan University (JUF1 and JUF2)—we explore how accessibility, design aesthetics, safety, emotional and psychological factors, and environmental considerations influence their decision to use footbridges. The findings reveal significant differences in the impact of these factors across universities. Notably, environmental considerations and design aesthetics are pivotal for ISUF students, while JUF1 and BAUF students prioritize convenience and time-saving. Furthermore, our research identifies a crucial difference in safety concerns, with female students exhibiting a higher focus on safety compared to their male counterparts. This highlights the need for gender-sensitive safety interventions in footbridge design. Environmental considerations consistently emerge as a priority for all, reflecting a collective concern for the eco-friendly features of bridge design. This study is considered the first of its kind in Amman City and the region. The results align with global findings, establishing a basis for wider implications concerning the development of theoretical knowledge of urban mobility. This research fills a crucial gap by providing empirical evidence of the diverse factors impacting footbridge usage. It offers valuable insights for urban planners seeking to design and maintain user-friendly and gender-sensitive footbridges, ultimately promoting sustainable urban mobility.

1. Introduction

Footbridges constitute a critical component of the urban transportation infrastructure, facilitating safe and efficient pedestrian mobility over obstacles. However, their potential often remains under realized, leading to issues such as traffic congestion, compromised public health, and less pedestrian-friendly urban environments [1]. Unraveling the factors that drive individuals to favor footbridges over alternative transportation modes is pivotal for sustainable urban planning and the formulation of targeted strategies to promote their usage [2,3]. Recent research emphasizes the need for more studies on pedestrian crossing facilities in developing and low-income countries [4,5]. This focus contributes to creating more pedestrian-friendly and environmentally sustainable cities. Furthermore, recent studies highlight the importance of considering cultural and social differences, as well as demographic influences, in pedestrian crossing research [6,7]. These studies, focusing on specific factors like young pedestrians’ perceptions of walkways [8] or the behavioral characteristics influencing walking speed [6,9], provide valuable insights. While in-depth studies investigating a specific set of factors can yield precise results, comprehensive studies like ours lay the groundwork for future specialized research. Therefore, our research contributes to the field by providing a comprehensive understanding of footbridge usage among university students.

Recognizing that university students represent a significant user group in urban areas, this research paper holds significant importance in understanding the dynamics of footbridge usage, particularly among university students in urban areas. This study centers on the investigation of key factors influencing footbridge usage and pedestrian behavior, with a specific focus on the vibrant demographic of university students in Amman City.

Four strategically located footbridges within Amman City are under examination: the Islamic Sciences University (ISUF), the University of Jordan—main gate (JUF1), the University of Jordan—agriculture faculty gate (JUF2), and Balqa Applied University (BAUF). The research objectives are as follows:

• Identify the key motivations and obstacles influencing the decision-making process of university students and young people when using footbridges in Amman City. This will be achieved through data collection using questionnaires, interviews, and observations.
• Assess the efficacy of these structures in meeting the unique requirements and preferences of university students to establish a profound understanding of the interplay between various factors and whether they serve as motivators or obstacles.
• Construct a holistic framework enriched with innovative design enhancements, designed to heighten footbridge utilization, safety, and accessibility.

This paper is organized as follows. The introduction outlines the study’s objectives and significance. The “Materials and Methods” section details the research design, including the structured questionnaires, descriptions of the study areas, and observational analysis. The “Results” section presents findings from both open-ended and closed-ended questions for each of the four bridges. The “Discussion” interprets these results in the context of the existing literature and includes a comparative analysis and the mean differences of study factors based on the bridge location and gender perspectives. It also examines factors influencing the choice between footbridges and other methods, including a ranking and comparative analysis. Finally, the “Conclusion” summarizes the key insights and suggests directions for future research.

1.1. Footbridge Infrastructure and Its Role in Urban Mobility

Urban environments are intricate systems with interconnected networks of streets that are crucial for pedestrian and vehicular movement. To enhance urban planning and design, especially in densely populated areas, it is important to comprehend the connection between urban form and movement [10]. This can guide decisions on the placement of amenities, transportation infrastructure, and public spaces to ensure an equitable distribution of movement opportunities and foster social interactions.

Footbridge infrastructure serves as a vital component of urban transportation systems, offering pedestrians secure and efficient routes to navigate physical barriers like busy roads, railways, rivers, and others [11]. These structures enhance pedestrian connectivity, fostering pedestrian-friendly and accessible cities [12]. Footbridges significantly enhance pedestrian safety by reducing conflicts with vehicular traffic, particularly in high-traffic areas or complex road configurations [11]. In the pursuit of creating sustainable urban environments, footbridges play a pivotal role by encouraging walking and active transportation, thus reducing traffic congestion and environmental impacts [13,14,15].

Numerous studies have shed light on the factors that influence footbridge usage, providing valuable insights for incentivizing higher utilization rates. Footbridge design and functionality are pivotal factors. Well-designed footbridges featuring adequate lighting and accessibility features tend to experience increased utilization [16]. Hasan and Napiah [17] advocate for well-designed footbridges characterized by width, accessibility, aesthetics, and lighting. Research consistently reveals the significance of these design aspects in attracting pedestrians [18,19]. Footbridges boasting appealing, well-maintained designs, coupled with adequate lighting and accessibility features, demonstrate higher usage rates [20]. The design itself influences perceptions of safety [18]. A footbridge with wide walkways, proper lighting, and clear signage appears significantly safer than its narrow, dimly lit, and inadequately marked counterpart [14,21].

Maigo [15] and Zhu [22] emphasize the role of footbridges in bridging gaps and barriers, facilitating pedestrian movement, and boosting overall connectivity within urban zones. By offering safe pathways across barriers, footbridges entice pedestrians to choose them over ground-level crossings of busy roads or railways [17,18]. Additionally, strategically placing footbridges to reduce walking distances and provide direct routes across barriers influences pedestrians to opt for footbridges as a convenient choice [11,15]. They provide an elevated, traffic-separated route that enhances safety and reduces accident risks.

When pedestrians are aware of footbridge locations and benefits, they are more likely to favor this mode of transit. Information and wayfinding systems that guide pedestrians to footbridge entrances and nearby points of interest significantly boost utilization rates [17].

Socio-cultural factors, such as social norms, safety perceptions, and cultural attitudes toward walking and physical activity influence footbridge usage [17,23,24]. Offering safe, convenient paths encourages walking as a preferred mode of transit, alleviating traffic congestion, enhancing air quality, and promoting public health [23]. Perceptions of safety, including security measures and surveillance, impact individuals’ willingness to use footbridges [18,25].

Moreover, footbridges that seamlessly integrate with public transportation systems tend to experience higher utilization rates as they facilitate convenient transfers between different modes of transportation [17,22]. Ensuring seamless interconnection with various modes of transportation encourages pedestrians to include footbridges in their travel routes.

Insights from studies are valuable in crafting actionable strategies to encourage footbridge utilization [17]. These strategies may include enhanced amenities, community engagement in design, maintenance protocols, multi-modal integration, and incentives for active transportation [19]. Raising awareness of the benefits of footbridge use, such as safety, convenience, and environmental impact, is crucial. Educating the public can stimulate usage, and awareness campaigns should be tailored to the prevalence of pedestrian accidents while being closely monitored.

1.2. Motivators and Obstacles to Footbridge Use in Urban Areas

Motivators and obstacles significantly shape footbridge usage within urban environments. A extensive body of prior research has delved into these factors, providing valuable insights for urban planners, policymakers, and city officials aiming to enhance footbridge utilization. The pragmatic approach to increasing footbridge use involves focusing on motivators and reducing obstacles (Figure 1). A categorization of these factors is as follows.

1.2.1. Motivators

• Enhanced connectivity: Footbridges offer pedestrians direct and efficient routes for crossing barriers like busy roads, railways, and rivers, while also integrating with their surroundings. This convenience can save time and effort, making footbridges a preferable choice [22,26].
• Safety and security: Footbridges create a safe and protected environment separated from vehicular traffic, a strong motivator for pedestrians, especially those concerned about their safety [27,28].
• Walkability and health benefits: Footbridges foster pedestrian-friendly environments and increase the walkability of urban spaces [29], and they promote active transportation, encouraging physical activity and improved health [30].
• Information and wayfinding: Clear signage and wayfinding systems simplify footbridge usage by helping pedestrians find their way and navigate efficiently [31].
• Aesthetic design: Footbridge design and pedestrian walkway considerations extend beyond functionality, enhancing the overall experience for pedestrians [18]. Aesthetic appeal, accessibility features, comfort, amenities, and well-maintained greenery create an inviting environment, encouraging daily use [32,33].

1.2.2. Obstacles

• Inconvenience and detours: Long walking distances and detours associated with footbridges can discourage their use. Pedestrians may opt for more direct routes, even if doing so involves crossing busy roads or railways at ground level [27,34].
• Poor design and maintenance: Footbridges lacking essential design features, such as width, accessibility, and lighting, can deter footbridge use. Similarly, poorly maintained footbridges perceived as unsafe or unattractive may discourage pedestrians [25,27].
• Perceived safety concerns: Despite footbridges being generally perceived as safe, concerns about personal safety in poorly lit or isolated areas can hinder their usage [35]. Pedestrians may prefer ground-level crossings in more populated and visible spaces [25,34].
• Lack of integration: Footbridges being are inadequately integrated with other modes of transportation, such as bus stops or train stations, can impede their use. Pedestrians may opt for alternative routes offering seamless transfers between transportation modes [15,36].

2. Materials and Methods

This research employs a mixed methodology to investigate individuals’ perceptions, preferences, and attitudes toward footbridges. The methodology is designed to provide a comprehensive understanding of the subject, incorporating two distinct types of analysis: analysis by observation and a structured questionnaire. Analysis by observation: Periodic site visits were conducted to the four footbridges under investigation in Amman City: Islamic Sciences University footbridge (ISUF), University of Jordan, main gate footbridge (JUF1), University of Jordan, Agriculture College gate footbridge (JUF2), and Balqa University footbridge (BAUF). These visits involved evaluating the structural integrity, design components, and integration of the footbridges within the urban context. Additionally, the user behavior and patterns of utilization were observed and recorded. The analysis by observation approach involved systematic and objective recording of participants’ behaviors, interactions, and emotional responses in real-world settings. This method allowed for the capture of spontaneous and authentic reactions as participants engaged with footbridges. This qualitative analysis complemented the understanding of real-time user behaviors and informed the interpretation of quantitative questionnaire data.

Questionnaire design: The central component of the research methodology, the questionnaire, aimed to gather structured and quantifiable data on participants’ perceptions. The questionnaire was organized into distinct criteria to explore various aspects of footbridge usage, including demographics, usage patterns and preferences, accessibility, design aesthetics and infrastructure, emotional and psychological aspects, safety concerns, and environmental impact. The questionnaire incorporated a range of question formats, including multiple-choice questions, Likert-scale statements, and open-ended questions, to ensure comprehensive data collection. Participants responded to each question using a five-point Likert scale, ranging from “Strongly Disagree” (one point) to “Strongly Agree” (five points).

Data collection methods: A quick response (QR) questionnaire was employed to efficiently collect quantitative data on footbridge usage motivators and obstacles. Participants could access the questionnaire by scanning a unique QR code using their smartphones or other mobile devices. QR codes were strategically placed in various locations in the study areas, specifically on footbridges. Once scanned, participants were directed to an online questionnaire. Study areas and sampling: The survey focused on university students, ensuring consistency in demographic variables while investigating motivators of and obstacles to footbridge usage. Four footbridges located in high-traffic areas of Amman City were selected: ISUF, JUF1, JUF2, and BAUF. These footbridges were chosen based on similarities and differences identified through a literature review. The selected footbridges are positioned in high-traffic areas, offering significant service facilities and accessibility to public transportation. They cater to commuting university students and support various user activities.

A total of 209 students from the four universities (ISUF, JUF1, JUF2, and BAUF) participated in the study, with a nearly equal distribution of male and female participants. Most students fell within the 18–25 age group, representing 73.7% of the sample, while only a small percentage (1.0%) were above 40 years old. Approximately one-quarter of the sample was collected from each university as shown in

Table 1. Participants’ demographic characteristics and footbridge affiliation. Source: Authors.

Variable	Categories	Frequency	Percentage %
Gender	Male	103	49.3
	Female	106	50.7
Age groups	18–25	154	73.7
	26–40	53	25.4
	>40	2	1.0
Footbridge	ISUF	51	24.4
	JUF1	56	26.8
	JUF2	50	23.9
	BAUF	52	24.9

. The comprehensive methodology enabled the collection of diverse data on footbridge usage motivators and obstacles, enhancing the depth and breadth of the research.

Broader Context and Limitations: While this study focuses on university students due to their frequent use of footbridges near university campuses, it is important to acknowledge that this demographic may not fully represent the broader population of footbridge users. This study aims to provide insights into the specific behaviors and preferences of this group. However, future research could expand the sample to include a more diverse range of participants from different age groups, occupations, and urban settings to enhance the generalizability of the findings.

The study tool was adopted from previous studies and exposed to an expert panel in the architecture and urban design field to validate it in terms of the clarity, simplicity, and relevancy. Their comments were taken into consideration, and the final study tool comprised five domains with 28 items. Moreover, a pilot study was conducted among 35 university students to test the study tool’s reliability, with the Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.756 to 0.825.

This study focuses on understanding user perceptions of existing footbridges. While the findings provide valuable insights for improving bridge design and utilization, it does not explore the methodologies for optimal footbridge placement within the urban landscape. Future research could address this gap by investigating methods that integrate user needs with factors like traffic flow patterns, land use planning, and cost-effectiveness to optimize the footbridge location.

The Study Area Description

During visits to the ISUF site (Figure 2), the following observations were made: The footbridge is situated on a two-way road with no barriers or central island, despite the high-speed and heavy traffic flow (Figure 3). On the one side, the footbridge connects to student parking lots and an Amman bus stop, with no student facilities or activities, limiting its use to mere transportation during working hours. On the opposite side, it leads to a pathway that branches into one section leading directly to the university gate and another to a service road adjacent to the university’s wall (Figure 4a). This service road is separated from the main street by a low wall, enabling pedestrians to cross to reach their destinations (Figure 4b). These edges, allowing pedestrians to cross the street, are essential. The bridge’s railings are constructed from perforated iron sheets, while its flooring consists of solid iron sheets. The bridge structure, suffering from rust and some structural instability, lacks an overhead covering (Figure 4c). Despite the semi-closed railings, the presence of a university security guard near the bridge gate may increase the perception of safety, especially in modest evening lighting.

Access to the bridge is provided by three sets of stairs with a low gradient near the student parking area (Figure 4d). On the side closer to the university gate, the few sets of stairs terminate with shaded ramps covered by trees surrounding the university. This design offers a high level of accessibility with a minimal number of staircases. However, the presence of homeless individuals on the bridge poses a utilization problem, with some users expressing fear and others facing delays. Several observations revealed that males were more willing to cross the street at times, whereas females exhibited reluctance. Students also voiced concerns about the bridge’s limited connection to the transportation network, with the exception of the Amman bus, which is not always sufficient in terms of the direction and timing.

Moving to the JUF1 and JUF2 footbridges (Figure 5), several commonalities were observed in their design. Both bridges are equipped with four escalators, one alongside the sidewalk leading to the university gate accompanied by stairs, and four elevators that correspond with the escalators, facilitating access to sidewalks leading to the main roads. Iron barriers separate these roads, making the bridges the sole means of transit (Figure 6).

These bridges are located along the same street, which crosses three streets. The central lane is designated for BRT buses, with a dedicated parking area for loading and unloading students, flanked by terminal streets catering to traffic in both directions. Public transportation stops are strategically positioned on both sides (Figure 7a). The lighting is designed to encourage evening use. Notably, there are void gaps within the steel and glass barriers of the footbridge, which stand at approximately one meter. This aspect allows some individuals to use the bridge as a vantage point for observing the surroundings of the University of Jordan (Figure 7b). While both bridges offer extensive facilities, including elevators and escalators, there are differences in the usage patterns. JUF1, located near the main gate, experiences higher use throughout the day and even during late hours. The surrounding area boasts numerous student facilities and local social and commercial facilities (Figure 7c). However, this increased foot traffic also results in congestion and escalator and elevator breakdowns.

JUF2, located near the agriculture faculty gate, experiences lower usage and is nearly empty during different times (Figure 7d). Although this results in less congestion, the empty bridge raises concerns about safety and vandalism. It is worth mentioning that some female students expressed a preference for taking the JUF1 instead of the JUF2, despite the longer distance traveled, due to the latter being empty of people in the evening hours. Additionally, some of them preferred using the elevators in groups rather than individually.

The BAUF footbridge crosses three main roads, with the central lanes designated for BRT bus routes, flanked by roads with high traffic congestion and high-speed vehicles. The road serves as a crucial link between the cities of Amman and Zarqa (Figure 8). The bridge is connected at its ends to public transportation stops and bus terminals. It is worth noting that from the side adjacent to the university, the bridge is not directly connected to the main gate, requiring students to traverse a distance through a side service road to reach the university gate.

The bridge is constructed of three massive stone structures, two at the ends and one in the middle, supporting the bridge span (Figure 9a). Its flooring is made of reinforced concrete, and its barriers are entirely made of concrete as well. There are no voids, and the barriers are approximately one meter in height, with corrugated iron sheets covering the top, creating an atmosphere of isolation, particularly during the evening hours (Figure 9b). The bridge is one of the highest among the four selected footbridges, further enhancing its spatial isolation from its surroundings. Access to the bridge from the side adjacent to the campus is provided by a one-flight staircase made of iron sheets leading to the entrance of the stone structure from this direction (Figure 9c). Access from the other end of the bridge, descending down, begins with the stone structure as well, forming a clear separation. It connects to a series of steps that culminate in ramps leading to the sidewalk level. These ramps are connected to an isolated pathway situated between the rear facade of the kiosks and the high bearing wall of the Pepsi Company. This creates a completely secluded passage from the street in this area (Figure 9d). During continuous monitoring, very few students were observed using the bridge, with most choosing to cross the street. The majority expressed fear of using the bridge due to its isolation, leading to the presence of loiterers around and inside the bridge, increasing instances of harassment. Evidence found inside the bridge, including drink bottles, supported these claims, and the bridge lacked maintenance and cleanliness in all its facilities.

3. Results

This section is divided into two main sections. The first section provides a brief descriptive analysis of the open-ended questions for each of the four bridges. The second section presents a quantitative analysis of the results from the closed-ended questions for each of the four bridges. This is followed by a comprehensive discussion of all four bridges together.

3.1. Descriptive Analysis

The findings from the descriptive analysis of the footbridge usage offer valuable insights into how pedestrians perceive and utilize the selected bridges. Each footbridge exhibits unique patterns of usage, and the associated open-ended responses shed light on these distinctions.

• ISUF Bridge: The ISUF footbridge is primarily used for functional purposes, with 43% of users indicating that their main objective is to cross from one side to the other, particularly during working hours. Interestingly, some students noted the bridge’s significance during graduation ceremonies and for capturing scenic moments. Moreover, user perceptions of security on this bridge were generally positive. Safety concerns centered on recommendations for improved lighting (31%) and maintenance (25%). Additionally, users emphasized the importance of enhancing the bridge’s aesthetics (35%) and making it more open and inviting, including decorations and seating areas (25%). Homelessness was noted as an issue affecting utilization (Figure 10).
• JUF1 Bridge: The JUF1 footbridge experiences consistent use throughout the day. For many users (35%), crossing the street safely and accessing buses were the primary motivations. Some students (11%) found joy in enjoying the views and capturing memorable photographs from the bridge. Safety was also a focus, with 21% of users highlighting the importance of clear security features. Users suggested the need for better signage (33%) and maintenance (17%). The bridge’s height and occasional escalator breakdowns were raised as security concerns. Encouragingly, a majority (62%) reported a lack of disturbing incidents, indicating a positive link between utilization and perceived safety (Figure 11).
• JUF2 Bridge: Footbridge JUF2 is also seen as essential for safe street crossing (45%). However, some students expressed reluctance to use it during the early morning or late evening hours, primarily due to the perceived isolation and the presence of few users. Safety concerns included occasional escalator malfunctions (23%) and the need for visible safety devices (22%). The importance of a signage system, reflectors, and maintenance was stressed (35%). The respondents’ fear of harassment, vandalism, or anti-social behavior on this footbridge was notable (63%). Users recommended design improvements, including more color (21%), various materials (27%), and aesthetic elements (28%) (Figure 12).
• BAUF Bridge: “Afternoon” was the most common period for utilizing the BAUF footbridge, primarily to access buses (35%) and to safely cross the street (17%). However, a surprising 29% found no benefit in using it. Safety concerns included incidents of harassment (22%), theft (16%), and vandalism (18%). The majority of users reported not feeling safe on this bridge, underscoring the seriousness of these issues (79%). To enhance the design, students suggested vibrant colors (25%), transparent windbreaks (34%), and the need for more open architecture (25%). They emphasized the need for proper lighting (21%) and the incorporation of artistic elements (17%) (Figure 13).

3.2. Quantitative and Statistical Analysis

This study employed a structured questionnaire to evaluate the perceptions of university students regarding the utilization of footbridges at four distinct locations within Amman City, as shown in

Table 2. University students’ perceptions of footbridge factors.

No	Item Description	ISUF		JUF1		JUF2		BAUF
		Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD	Mean	SD
	Accessibility Aspect	4.01	0.65	3.80	0.57	3.79	0.57	3.71	0.49
A1	Enhancing the accessibility of footbridges (e.g., adding ramps, elevators) would promote their utilization.	4.49	0.31	4.27	0.68	4.24	0.58	4.31	0.56
A2	We usually find footbridges ready for the presence of many pedestrians.	3.24	1.18	3.30	1.09	3.20	1.12	2.90	1.14
A3	Easy access to footbridges in my area.	3.86	1.10	3.41	1.28	3.30	1.23	3.31	1.03
A4	Integrating footbridges with other pedestrian infrastructure (e.g., sidewalks, crosswalks) would promote their utilization.	4.45	0.47	4.23	0.61	4.42	0.58	4.33	0.63
	Design Aesthetics and Infrastructure Aspects	4.35	0.52	4.03	0.57	4.13	0.49	4.22	0.53
D1	The visual appeal and architectural design of footbridges significantly influenced my decision to use them.	4.35	0.57	4.11	0.85	4.22	0.59	4.23	0.63
D2	Enhancing the visual appeal and aesthetics of footbridges would encourage people to use them.	4.39	0.52	4.25	0.56	4.28	0.53	4.17	0.36
D3	The presence of well-designed and maintained footbridges would encourage you to use them.	4.31	0.45	4.05	0.90	4.28	0.70	4.48	0.47
D4	Improving the design and maintenance of footbridges contributes to enhancing their use.	4.61	0.33	4.14	0.86	4.38	0.58	4.56	0.27
D5	Providing clear signage and information about footbridge locations, advantages, and accessibility features enhance their usage.	4.47	0.32	4.05	0.77	4.16	0.73	4.25	0.30
D6	The convenience of using a footbridge has a significant impact compared to other alternatives like crosswalks or road intersections.	4.49	0.42	4.14	0.80	4.04	0.79	4.21	0.60
D7	It is important that footbridges are designed to blend harmoniously with the surrounding environment and architecture.	4.43	0.48	3.95	0.82	4.22	0.61	4.19	0.68
D8	The inclusion of green spaces or seating areas on footbridges would enhance users’ experience and encourage the utilization of these bridges.	4.18	0.57	3.96	0.97	4.06	0.80	4.13	0.63
D9	Incorporating artistic elements or sculptures on footbridges would positively impact their overall appeal and usage.	4.43	0.51	3.91	0.86	4.00	0.93	4.15	0.82
D10	The design of fenced open bridges is more convenient than the closed design.	3.80	1.17	3.68	1.18	3.62	1.0	3.85	0.69
	Emotional and Psychological Aspects	3.52	0.55	3.61	0.65	3.54	0.65	4.00	0.80
EP1	I feel comfortable while using footbridges.	4.33	0.54	4.05	0.92	3.78	1.02	3.98	0.82
EP2	I sometimes feel anxiety or stressed when using footbridges.	2.41	1.25	3.16	1.17	3.12	1.35	4.17	0.56
EP3	Footbridges are safer compared to other means of crossing busy roads.	4.57	0.37	4.02	0.84	4.14	0.83	4.10	0.64
EP4	I have avoided using footbridges due to emotional reasons or discomfort.	2.76	1.27	3.20	1.31	3.12	1.22	3.75	0.37
	Safety concerns	4.38	0.54	4.21	0.57	4.17	0.55	4.40	0.47
SC1	I believe footbridges are well maintained in terms of safety.	3.80	0.36	3.62	1.17	3.36	1.21	4.15	0.85
SC2	Well-lit footbridges during the evening or night are important to ensure safety and visibility.	4.41	0.64	4.38	0.51	4.48	0.54	4.48	0.36
SC3	The presence of handrails on footbridges is essential for user safety.	4.59	0.24	4.50	0.43	4.36	0.58	4.50	0.38
SC4	Non-slip surfaces on footbridges contribute to a feeling of safety, especially during rainy weather.	4.53	0.40	4.39	0.60	4.42	0.78	4.40	0.59
SC5	There should be other safety features implemented on footbridges to enhance user safety and security.	4.55	0.44	4.14	0.72	4.22	0.69	4.44	0.50
	Environmental Impact	4.33	0.57	3.94	0.61	4.10	0.62	4.03	0.73
EI1	Reduction of traffic congestion and pollution is a motivating factor to utilize footbridges.	4.39	0.52	4.04	0.91	4.44	0.37	3.98	0.61
EI2	Using footbridges contributes to an eco-friendly transportation system.	4.41	0.54	4.04	0.87	4.14	0.47	4.17	0.96
EI3	I prefer eco-friendly footbridges.	4.18	0.79	4.11	0.73	4.14	0.65	4.10	0.85
EI4	I am interested in initiatives promoting eco-friendly transportation.	4.24	0.71	3.54	0.95	3.78	0.95	3.75	0.97
EI5	Eco-friendly design practices are important for footbridges.	4.45	0.53	4.00	0.87	4.00	0.69	4.15	0.75

. The questionnaire explores several factors that influence students’ decisions to use these footbridges, encompassing accessibility, design aesthetics and infrastructure aspects, emotional and psychological aspects, safety concerns, and environmental impact. The analysis is divided into four subsections, each corresponding to one of the universities under study.

3.2.1. ISUF Footbridge

• Accessibility aspect: Beyond the integration with the existing pedestrian infrastructure, ISUF students expressed a strong appreciation for accessibility enhancements such as ramps and elevators. They believed that these features would significantly encourage and facilitate the use of footbridges.
• Design aesthetics and infrastructure aspects: Enhancing the visual appeal and architectural design of footbridges significantly influenced students’ decisions to use them. The presence of well-designed and maintained footbridges was identified as a strong motivator for utilization. Students highlighted the importance of artistic elements and green spaces on footbridges to enhance their overall appeal and encourage utilization.
• Emotional and psychological aspects: ISUF students consistently reported a sense of ease and comfort while utilizing footbridges, showing a lack of significant anxiety or stress associated with these structures. This positive sentiment can be attributed to their perception of footbridges as secure and reliable alternatives. However, it is noteworthy that a moderate level of avoidance exists among some individuals, who cite emotional reasons or discomfort as factors influencing their decision to avoid using footbridges.
• Safety concerns: Students at ISUF emphasized the importance of non-slip surfaces for safety. They also recognized the significance of well-lit footbridges during the evening or night to ensure safety and visibility. The presence of other safety features and handrails was considered essential for user safety.
• Environmental impact: The motivation to utilize footbridges was notably driven by the desire to alleviate traffic congestion and reduce pollution. Additionally, students emphasized a preference for eco-friendly footbridge design practices. Their interest extended to initiatives promoting environmentally conscious transportation methods, underlining a clear commitment to sustainability.

3.2.2. JUF1 Footbridge

• Accessibility aspect: JUF1 students believed that incorporating accessibility enhancers, such as ramps and elevators, would effectively encourage the utilization of footbridges. Additionally, they identified integration with other pedestrian infrastructure as a crucial factor promoting the widespread use of footbridges.
• Design aesthetics and infrastructure aspects: Like ISUF, students at JUF1 stressed the significance of well-designed and maintained footbridges in motivating utilization. They found clear signage and information about footbridges essential.
• Emotional and psychological aspects: JUF1 students, overall, reported a sense of comfort when using footbridges, primarily attributing it to the perceived safety of these structures compared to other methods of crossing busy roads. However, occasional feelings of anxiety or stress were noted among some students, particularly related to concerns such as fear of heights or crowds associated with footbridges.
• Safety concerns: They acknowledged the importance of safety features, non-slip surface, well-lit structures, and the presence of handrails to enhance safety.
• Environmental impact: Students at JUF1 showed a preference for eco-friendly footbridges, emphasizing the importance of reducing traffic congestion and pollution.

3.2.3. JUF2 Footbridge

• Accessibility aspect: JUF2 students held the belief that the incorporation of accessibility enhancers and the seamless integration of footbridges with other pedestrian infrastructure would serve as effective measures to encourage and promote their utilization.
• Design aesthetics and infrastructure aspects: Like the previous universities, JUF2 students underscored the importance of well-designed and well-maintained footbridges. They emphasized the integration of artistic elements and green spaces.
• Emotional and psychological aspects: These students also occasionally felt anxiety or stress when using footbridges, but they were less comfortable than the previous footbridges, primarily during low-traffic hours. They regarded footbridges as safer compared to other means of crossing busy roads.
• Safety concerns: JUF2 students also believed in the importance of well-lit structures during the evening or night, and the presence of handrails for user safety. Non-slip surfaces were also perceived as valuable for safety.
• Environmental impact: JUF2 students expressed the motivation to use footbridges due to the reduction of traffic congestion and pollution, emphasizing the importance of an eco-friendly transportation system.

3.2.4. BAUF Footbridge

• Accessibility aspect: BAUF students concurred with their counterparts from the other universities in recognizing the importance of integrating footbridges with other pedestrian infrastructure and incorporating accessibility enhancers as strategies to promote utilization. However, their perception of the readiness of footbridges for accommodating a significant number of pedestrians was comparatively lower, suggesting potential concerns.
• Design aesthetics and infrastructure aspects: Students at BAUF stressed the importance of clear signage, well-designed and maintained footbridges, and the presence of green spaces or seating areas.
• Emotional and psychological aspects: Despite perceiving footbridges as safer alternatives for crossing busy roads, these students reported feeling less comfortable while using them, with high levels of anxiety and stress. A notable proportion of students opted to avoid footbridges due to emotional reasons.
• Safety concerns: BAUF students underscored the importance of well-maintained footbridges, well-lit structures during the evening or night, and the presence of handrails to ensure user safety. Non-slip surfaces also were deemed essential for overall safety in their perception.
• Environmental impact: Students at BAUF demonstrated a preference for eco-friendly footbridges, with an emphasis on an eco-friendly transportation system.

4. Discussion

The quantitative analysis of user responses for each bridge offers a comprehensive insight into the specific motivators and obstacles at each location. Notably, a consistent trend emerges emphasizing the significance of safety and visible security features, aligning with the research conducted by Landa-Blanco and Ávila (2020) [25]. Recommendations for improvement, such as enhanced lighting, appear to be an important element. The studies by Syahrunnizam (2022) [16] and Anciaes and Jones (2018) [35] further support these findings as motivating elements for bridge use. Maintenance also emerges as a critical factor, with user feedback highlighting the lack thereof as a substantial barrier to utilization, corroborated by research from Arsandrie and Prakoso (2020) [27]. Aesthetic considerations, including vibrant colors, artistic elements, and greenery, are also emphasized by users. This desire for appealing aesthetics and open designs with comfortable seating aligns with the findings of Hasan and Napiah (2017) [17] and Forciniti and Eboli [18]. The integration of footbridges with public transportation significantly influences user perceptions, echoing the insights from Maigo (2018) [15] and Zhu (2023) [22]. Furthermore, in line with the research by Hełdak (2021) [14] and Van and Haans (2018) [21], the provision of a signage system and attention to small details are identified as factors that positively contribute to the overall user experience.

There is growing evidence to support the link between strategically placed foot-bridges and student travel mode selection. Studies by Li et al. (2023) [7], Zhu (2023) [22], Anciaes and Jones (2018) [35] and Arellana et al. (2022) [36] highlight the importance of convenience, directness, and connectivity in influencing pedestrian choices. Well-located footbridges can offer a time-saving and convenient alternative to congested intersections or lengthy detours, potentially encouraging students to choose walking over car transportation [22,35]. Additionally, footbridges that effectively bridge gaps and connect key destinations within the university environment can significantly increase the likelihood of students opting for active travel modes like walking and cycling [25]. Furthermore, research by Ahmed et al. (2024) [4] demonstrates that infrastructure promoting active travel, such as strategically placed pedestrian bridges, can positively influence students’ decisions to choose walking or cycling rather than driving.

4.1. Summary of University Students’ Perceptions Regarding Utilization of Footbridges in Amman City: A Comparative Analysis

• Safety concerns: The results presented in Figure 14 unveil noteworthy disparities in perceptions concerning the factors influencing the utilization of footbridges across the different universities; however, they shared that the safety is a top factor for using footbridges and an overarching consensus exists regarding the paramount importance of safety factor. Numerous prior studies, such as [11,17,23,25,27], have supported this idea.
• Design aesthetics and infrastructure: The collective recognition of design aesthetics and infrastructure as the second crucial factor underscores the significance students attribute to the visual appeal and overall structural quality of footbridges. This suggests that well-designed and aesthetically pleasing footbridges hold the potential to stimulate their utilization. Syahrunnizam (2022) [16], Hasan and Napiah (2017) [17] and Pereira (2024) [19] emphasize the significance of meticulously designed footbridges that provide pedestrians with safe and convenient pathways. The authors highlight key factors, including the width, accessibility, aesthetics, and lighting, as pivotal elements influencing the appeal and utilization of footbridges.
• Environmental impact: The unanimous acknowledgment of environmental impact as the third significant factor underscores a shared commitment to eco-friendly considerations. The significance of this was highlighted by the research conducted by Hełdak (2021) [14] and Maigo (2018) [15]. This alignment with global concerns related to sustainability and environmental consciousness positions environmental awareness as a differentiating factor that can promote the use of footbridges.
• Discrepancies in accessibility: The observed discrepancies in the ranking of the accessibility and emotional/psychological aspects indicate the variation in emphasis placed on these factors by students from the different universities. Nevertheless, the students of ISUF, JUF1 and JUF2 have agreed that the accessibility and emotional and psychological aspects were the fourth and fifth important factors concerning pedestrians’ use of footbridges, respectively, while the students of BAUF perceived that the emotional and psychological factor to be the fourth factor and accessibility to be the fifth important factor influencing pedestrians’ use of footbridges. These disparities may be influenced by the specific accessibility features and attributes of footbridges in each of the four locations.
• Unique perspective of BAUF: BAUF’s unique approach, prioritizing emotional and psychological factors over accessibility, sets it apart from other institutions. This emphasis appears to stem from the design of the bridge, which is somewhat isolated from its surroundings, contributing to negative behaviors observed in connection with other bridges. This design discrepancy significantly influences perceptions of safety and directly impacts the emotional experience of pedestrians, particularly for BAUF students. Therefore, it becomes imperative to investigate interventions aimed at improving the emotional experience associated with the use of this footbridge. This finding is highly supported by the studies of [14,21,34].

These findings hold significant implications for urban planning and pedestrian infrastructure design. Recognizing the nuanced preferences and priorities of diverse student populations provides valuable guidance for the development of footbridges aligned with user requirements and expectations specific to each location. This entails the design of pedestrian infrastructure that not only prioritizes safety and functionality but also resonates with the varied preferences and priorities of the user base. In summary, this study unveils the multifaceted nature of university students’ perceptions regarding footbridge utilization. Safety remains a steadfast priority, while the differing perspectives on the other factors underscore the importance of tailoring pedestrian infrastructure to the unique characteristics and expectations of the respective student populations.

4.2. Analysis of Mean Differences in the Study Factors Impact According to University

To ascertain if there are statistically significant variations in university students’ perceptions regarding the components influencing the use of footbridges, a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) with the Schaffer post hoc test was employed. The results presented in

Table 3. Mean differences in study factors impact according to university locations. Source: Authors.

University	Mean ± SD	F-Value	p-Value	Post Hoc/p Value	Dependent Variable
ISUF A JUF1 B JUF2 C BAUF D	4.01 ± 0.65 3.80 ± 0.57 3.79 ± 0.57 3.71 ± 0.49	2.540	0.058	---	Accessibility
ISUF A JUF1 B JUF2 C BAUF D	4.35 ± 0.52 4.03 ± 0.57 4.13 ± 0.49 4.22 ± 0.53	3.561	0.015	AB, p = 0.022	Design Aesthetics and Infrastructure
ISUF A JUF1 B JUF2 C BAUF D	3.52 ± 0.55 3.61 ± 0.65 3.54 ± 0.65 4.00 ± 0.80	5.901	<0.001	DA, p = 0.005 DB, p = 0.027 DC, p = 0.008	Emotional and Psychological
ISUF A JUF1 B JUF2 C BAUF D	4.38 ± 0.54 4.21 ± 0.57 4.17 ± 0.55 4.40 ± 0.47	2.044	0.109	---	Safety Concerns
ISUF A JUF1 B JUF2 C BAUF D	4.33 ± 0.57 3.94 ± 0.61 4.10 ± 0.62 4.03 ± 0.73	3.627	0.014	AB, p = 0.017 AD, p = 0.020	Environmental Impact

indicate notable distinctions among the universities.

Design aesthetics and infrastructure: ISUF showed a significantly higher mean score (4.35) for design aesthetics and infrastructure compared to JUF1 (4.03), with a p-value of 0.022. This underscores ISUF students’ heightened emphasis on the visual and architectural aspects of footbridges. Tailoring footbridge designs to align with ISUF’s aesthetic preferences may bolster utilization.

Emotional and psychological aspects: BAUF demonstrated significantly higher scores for emotional and psychological aspects compared to the other universities (p < 0.05 for all). This consistent trend implies a unique perspective among BAUF students, possibly influenced by the design of their bridge and contrasting behaviors at other locations. Addressing emotional and psychological factors may be particularly pertinent at BAUF.

Environmental impact: ISUF exhibited a significantly higher mean score for environmental impact compared to JUF1 (p = 0.017) and BAUF (p = 0.020). This indicates a stronger eco-friendly focus among ISUF students. Further initiatives promoting eco-friendly features may enhance footbridge utilization at ISUF.

Accessibility and safety concerns: While no statistically significant mean differences were observed in terms of accessibility and safety concerns among the universities (p-values of 0.058 and 0.109, respectively), the proximity of these values suggests the universality of these concerns across the entire student community at the four footbridges. This is consistent with the findings of Hasan and Napiah (2017) [17] and Forciniti and Eboli [18].

These analyses provide nuanced insights into how different components of footbridge utilization are perceived across the universities. Tailored interventions, considering safety, aesthetics, psychological factors, and eco-friendliness, can contribute to enhancing footbridge utilization in Amman City.

4.3. Gender-Based Variations in Student Perceptions of Footbridge Utilization

Our investigation extended to the components of footbridge utilization concerning students’ gender. The results summarized in

Table 4. Mean differences in study factors based on university students’ gender perspectives.

Student’s Gender	Mean ± SD	F-Value	p-Value	Dependent Variable
Male Female	3.81 ± 0.57 3.84 ± 0.59	0.129	0.719	Accessibility
Male Female	4.12 ± 0.55 4.23 ± 0.53	1.944	0.165	Design Aesthetics and Infrastructure
Male Female	3.60 ± 0.68 3.73 ± 0.70	1.702	0.193	Emotional and Psychological
Male Female	4.16 ± 0.64 4.41 ± 0.51	9.843	0.002	Safety Concerns
Male Female	4.01 ± 0.68 4.18 ± 0.60	3.614	0.059	Environmental Impact

unveil that, notably, concern about safety was the sole factor reflecting a significant mean difference based on students’ gender (mean = 4.41 vs. 4.16), and the significant p value of (p = 0.002), with a noteworthy F-value of 9.843. Specifically, female students express more profound safety concerns compared to their male counterparts [37]. This suggests that safety measures, including security provisions, clear signage, well-maintained and well-lit footbridges, are of heightened importance for female students.

4.4. Factors Influencing the Choice between Footbridges and Other Methods Ranking and Comparative Analysis

In this research investigation, participants were asked to rank their preference for using footbridges over alternative methods. The results, as presented in

Table 5. Factors influencing students’ choice of footbridges versus other methods. Source: Authors.

Footbridge	Convenience and Timesaving	Safety and Security	Aesthetics and Visual Appeal of the Footbridge	Environmental Considerations	Ease of Accessibility for All Users
ISUF	29.4%	25.5%	35.3%	36.3%	33.3%
JUF1	30.6%	26.8%	17.9%	28.6%	30.4%
JUF2	36.0%	32.0%	32.6%	60.0%	48.0%
BAUF	34.6%	31.8%	21.2%	38.5%	30.8%

, shed light on the varying factors that influence this choice across the different universities.

ISUF demonstrated a significant emphasis on environmental considerations and the aesthetics and visual appeal of the footbridge, with 36.3% and 35.3% of participants ranking these factors at the top, respectively.

JUF1, on the other hand, placed high importance on convenience and time-saving (30.6%) and the ease of accessibility for all users (30.4%) as their primary motivating factors for choosing footbridges.

JUF2 exhibited a strong focus on environmental considerations (60.0%) and ease of accessibility for all users (48.0%) as the key factors influencing their preference footbridges.

BAUF participants prioritized environmental considerations (38.5%) and convenience and time-saving (34.6%) as the most influential factors impacting their choice to use footbridges.

Despite the variations in the top-ranked factors among these universities, a consistent trend emerges whereby environmental considerations stand out as having a common and significant influence on students’ choices. This shared emphasis on sustainability and eco-friendly transportation solutions transcends university boundaries, signifying a collective awareness of the environmental impact of footbridge usage among youths.

The presence of this shared concern suggests that students are not inherently averse to using footbridges. Instead, their decisions are significantly influenced by other factors that can either incentivize or hinder their utilization of footbridges. Furthermore, the studies from references [14,15,23] concur that interventions aimed at encouraging footbridge use should consider the environmental aspect as a powerful motivating factor, and therefore, for students across different universities.

5. Conclusions

This research explores university students’ perceptions of footbridges in Amman City through a comprehensive analysis of various factors affecting their utilization. The findings provide valuable insights into the factors influencing students’ choices, high-lighting nuances in preferences across universities and genders. This study highlighted the universality of concerns related to accessibility and safety across the entire student community, emphasizing the widespread significance of these factors. Other factors such as design aesthetics, environmental impact, and emotional and psychological aspects play vital roles in shaping students’ perceptions and decisions regarding footbridge utilization despite the primarily utilitarian use of these bridges. Moreover, the research uncovered notable differences in these factors across the universities, as they are directly related to the state of the bridge design and its location, which indicates the need for specialized design interventions and decisions to improve the use of footbridges and to move away from the idea of the typical design of footbridges within the urban context.

Importantly, this study highlighted that environmental considerations consistently emerged as a significant influence across all the universities. This collective awareness of the environmental impact of footbridge usage suggests that students are receptive to eco-friendly transportation solutions. Therefore, urban planners and policymakers can leverage this shared concern to enhance footbridge utilization by emphasizing sustainability and eco-friendly aspects in the design and maintenance of footbridges. Another critical finding from the study was the gender-based differences in safety concerns. Female students exhibited a significantly higher concern for safety measures than their male counterparts. This highlights the importance of the integration of gender-sensitive safety interventions to address these concerns.

This study is considered the first of its kind in the Amman City and the region, and its results were very similar to the results of studies in different regions of the world, which provides a basis for wider implications for theoretical knowledge development in the field of urban mobility. A future direction for this research involves engaging additional user categories to ensure a more comprehensive study, particularly exploring variations in perceptions among different groups; moreover, extending this research to other urban pedestrian infrastructure components could facilitate a comparative analysis of the factors influencing pedestrian pathways across various contexts. By addressing these factors and making evidence-based improvements, cities can create more user-friendly and safer pedestrian infrastructure and align with the varied preferences and priorities of the user population, encouraging a shift toward sustainable and pedestrian-friendly urban mobility.