4 ms·

Another potentially harmful effect is that drivers tend to be less cautious around helmeted cyclists: http://cordis.europa.eu/news/rcn/26335_en.html http://cord

by Hinrik 13y ago

Another potentially harmful effect is that drivers tend to be less cautious around helmeted cyclists: http://cordis.europa.eu/news/rcn/26335_en.html http://cordis.europa.eu/news/rcn/26335_en.html

analog31 13y ago
This is a study that I'd definitely need to see repeated. The "reproducibility crisis" looms large.
- dalke 13y ago
  Don't know why you were downvoted. The BMJ article even gives the caveat "albeit with a single author and subject." Hinrik: the BMJ paper we're talking about also gives the actual citation, not the commentary that you point to. BTW, looking at the citations to that paper, there's a re-analysis of the same data, at http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0075424 http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjourna... . It broadly agrees with Walker's conclusion, but notes a diminished effect of wearing a helmet: > Risk compensation theory for helmet wearing while cycling has generated increased interest in the peer-reviewed literature, although there is little to no evidence to support the theory. Walker's [2] argument that helmet wearing affects the behaviour of motor vehicle drivers does not support risk compensation theory upon re-analysis. Helmet wearing is associated with a small difference in passing distance and is not associated with close passing. The evidence from this study does not justify recommendations around helmet wearing, but rather highlights the more important factors of kerb distance, road characteristics and traffic type which may inform more effective cycling safety improvements. It too says "This study has several limitations with regards to the data. Ian Walker was the only cyclist observed and therefore his cycling behaviour may not be representative of cyclists in general", then lists other limitations.

4 ms·

Another potentially harmful effect is that drivers tend to be less cautious around helmeted cyclists: http://cordis.europa.eu/news/rcn/26335_en.html http://cord

by Hinrik 13y ago

Another potentially harmful effect is that drivers tend to be less cautious around helmeted cyclists: http://cordis.europa.eu/news/rcn/26335_en.html http://cordis.europa.eu/news/rcn/26335_en.html

analog31 13y ago
This is a study that I'd definitely need to see repeated. The "reproducibility crisis" looms large.
- dalke 13y ago
  Don't know why you were downvoted. The BMJ article even gives the caveat "albeit with a single author and subject." Hinrik: the BMJ paper we're talking about also gives the actual citation, not the commentary that you point to. BTW, looking at the citations to that paper, there's a re-analysis of the same data, at http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0075424 http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjourna... . It broadly agrees with Walker's conclusion, but notes a diminished effect of wearing a helmet: > Risk compensation theory for helmet wearing while cycling has generated increased interest in the peer-reviewed literature, although there is little to no evidence to support the theory. Walker's [2] argument that helmet wearing affects the behaviour of motor vehicle drivers does not support risk compensation theory upon re-analysis. Helmet wearing is associated with a small difference in passing distance and is not associated with close passing. The evidence from this study does not justify recommendations around helmet wearing, but rather highlights the more important factors of kerb distance, road characteristics and traffic type which may inform more effective cycling safety improvements. It too says "This study has several limitations with regards to the data. Ian Walker was the only cyclist observed and therefore his cycling behaviour may not be representative of cyclists in general", then lists other limitations.