Perception of safety - research ideas, opinions needed!

Long time snooper, first time poster.

My name is Craig, and I am a doctor doing a masters degree in sports medicine. Being a keen cyclist, I wanted to do my research into something useful.

Adult cyclists are dying on roads every day, and I feel not enough is being done to address this with regards to cycling awareness, or raising the issue of safety perception amongst adult cyclists.

The government have a Bikeability course, which is aimed at children - but there is no accredited national course for adult cyclists.

Do people think this could be interesting area to look into? Would people be interested in attending a course aimed at adults?

Any ideas, suggestions, comments, and sarcasm is welcome.

Thanks for your time.

The government have a Bikeability course, which is aimed at children

Pretty sure that it's aimed at adults too.

Can adults take part in Bikeability?

Yes, adults can take part in Bikeability. The skills taught as part of Bikeability will last a lifetime, and it is never too late to learn.

Your local authority might have an adult cycle training offer. They might call it Bikeability, or refer to the National Standard for cycle training, the standard upon which Bikeability is based.

Ask in here

This sub-forum might be useful to you
http://www.lfgss.com/microcosms/539/

^Oh, that wasn't sarcasm by the way, despite you welcoming it.

Thanks, I'll post it over there.

The bikeability course is available for adults, but as far I can see it's not designed for them. Still waiting for an email back from them with regards to any research/evidence based on adults undertaking the course.

your own body, the BMA, has published some excellent guidance on living with risk, suggest you read up

or > https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/358042/rrcgb2013-02.pdf

and > http://www.ctc.org.uk/resources/ctc-cycling-statistics

in particular > http://www.ctc.org.uk/resources/ctc-cycling-statistics#How many people think that cycling is too dangerous?

Adult cyclists are dying on roads every day, and I feel not enough is being done to address this with regards to cycling awareness, or raising the issue of safety perception amongst adult cyclists.

I don't really understand this sentence. Do you mean you feel a lack of general aweness of cycing, and the perceived safety of cycling is a contributer to cycling KSIs?

I'm not a bikeability instructor but here's my understanding on this. The Bikeability course is basically based on outcomes that determine what you should know about riding on the road and feel capable of doing. This isn't something that would change between adults and children. What is likely to change is the delivery of the training to acheive those outcomes. It's comparable to the differences in how you might teach literacy to children and non-literate adults because of the differences in how people learn. So to say that "there is no accredited national course for adult cyclists" isn't really accurate.

Also just to clarify another point, adult cyclists aren't dying on our roads every day. Fortunately cyclists fatalities are significantly less frequent than this. One of the most important starting points for the perception of risk is accurate representation of facts.

I don't really understand this sentence. Do you mean you feel a lack of general aweness of cycing, and the perceived safety of cycling is a contributer to cycling KSIs?

Sounds a little like victim-blaming to me.

All helpful comments, thanks.

I should have put injured, rather than killed. My apologies.

My project would be looking at whether you could modify perception of risk and safety, with an intervention ie: a cycling course.

I know that cyclists are not to blame for the majority of accidents (one study suggested that only 15% of accidents involving cyclists were due to the cyclist) - but the end goal is risk reduction to cyclists regardless of who is at fault.

"but the end goal is risk reduction to cyclists regardless of who is at fault"

Part of the issue is the widespread tendency to split road users into categories. If we as a society stopped focusing on differences and just chilled out when using roads then the first step toward minimising conflict would be taken.
I strongly believe that focusing on cyclist's awareness is one of the last measures to take. Things like 20mph limits, priorities based on vulnerability and speed (foot>bike>motor) and campaigns on road awareness should be a good start though.

As cyclists are not the major cause of the collisions the behaviour change should be directed towards those that do cause the collisions.

So to modify the perception you need to be educating drivers first, and cyclists second. Also adequate enforcement of current laws and probably legislation as to what is a safe distance to overtake. Add in strict liability.

I say all this yet am also a cycling instructor working with children, adults and professional drivers.

Look how you've phrased it:

Adult cyclists are dying on roads every day, and I feel not enough is being done to address this with regards to cycling awareness, or raising the issue of safety perception amongst adult cyclists. The government have a Bikeability course, which is aimed at children - but there is no accredited national course for adult cyclists.

You go from decrying the KSI stats to encouraging cycle training. In fact you don't mention drivers at all. There is no evidence that cycle training makes cycling safer. There is no evidence that lack of cycle training is even in the top 20 causes of collisions. If novice cyclists were causing collisions you'd reasonably expect Ken bikes to have a higher casualty rate, but in fact it's lower than that suffered by "normal" riders. Illegal or risky behaviour by cyclists is a factor in just 6% of KSI RTCs:

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study

There are, in short, more important things to focus on.

I still don't understand your hypothesis.

Train people and they might better understand the risks and dangers they are exposed to? Well yeah, of course - if that's the objective, or part of the objectives of the training, sure, you are probably going to do that.

I know it's 'only' a Masters thesis, but I'd have thought you'd need something meatier than that.

I totally agree that more needs to be done to address the non-cyclist causative factors of accidents.

However, given the fact I am aware of my limitations I have to be realistic in what I can address.

If people have a modification to my project which they think could be more helpful or appropriate I would really appreciate the input.

My project would be looking at whether you could modify perception of risk and safety, with an intervention ie: a cycling course.

I don't want to piss on your chips but modification of perception through education is a well established, supported and evidenced fact. With regards to perception of risk, safety and cycling courses. I think we already know this as well. As in scientifically know this through study and research.

I wanted to do my research into something useful.

I laud your intentions here but I don't think this will be "useful" in as much as it won't tell us anything new. Perhaps trawl through the existing research for a bit and see if there are some gaps that might might prove useful to be closed or save yourself the effort and knock out a paper on whether water is wet.

Adult cyclists are dying on roads every day

They're not, it's about every fourth day. So you inflate the dangers of cycling then link those dangers to cycle training. I don't think it's unrealistic to focus on where the danger actually comes from, it would be strictly limited to your master's and would be doing something useful.

What limitations exactly? It's a 'thesis' not a white paper - you don't have to deal in 'realism'.

you don't have to deal in 'realism'

Depends what you want from it. I know people who have used their thesis as a springboard in to industry and a career. If that's what you want, then a bit of realism is a very good thing I'd have thought.

Surely the more ambitious a thesis is the more likely it would be to impress any future employer - rather than offering some purely empirical number-based study on whether training courses for adults do or do not reduce the amount of cycling deaths on the road.

Adult cyclists are dying on roads every day, and I feel not enough is being done to address this

It wouldn't be exceeding your brief to widen the debate and ask whether a society where a significant number of drivers express a hatred toward cyclists can result in a legal process that punishes a driver more severely for hitting and killing a swan in broad daylight than a cyclist.

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/local/portsmouth-man-says-sorry-to-the-queen-for-killing-a-swan-1-6976980

http://lcc.org.uk/articles/cyclists-demonstrate-against-cps-and-driver-apathy

offering some purely empirical number-based study on whether training courses for adults do or do not reduce the amount of cycling deaths on the road

If you could supply that with a reasonable degree of certainty within the restrictions of an MSc thesis, a lot of people would want to talk to you :)

As I said, your approach depends a great deal on what you want from it. Interested in more accedemia, then sure, you can go more theoretical. Interested in a specific industry or profession, give yourself a tight, original brief you can answer effectively.

6 points and £790 in fines!?

Where can I buy a swan costume?

Earlier in Portsmouth:

http://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/local/163-600-fine-for-killing-cyclist-1-1229439

This is a Masters we're talking about, right? Surely there needs to be more to it than simple proof that one can handle statistics?