Remember kids... always wear a helmet. (The almighty bikeradar helmet thread)

Does anyone have any non-crazy evidence to back up the claim that:
'I'm not surprise, more than half the nodder in London take even more risk when riding because they're under the illusion that they're 'safer' due to wearing helmet, day-glo jacket, glove etc.'

Or something along those lines. I've never seen anything to back it up.

BTW I'm not suggesting its wrong. Just that I see it bandied about in these arguments and I can't help disagreeing with it (for the most part).

Personally I don't believe I ride any more or less agressively with or without my helmet. I may well ride slower without it but its not as if I ride dangerously with it on. I'm capable of judging what is safe and not without having to check if I have a helmet on or not.

Also I ride with gloves purely for the comfort/performance factor. It has nothing to do with the safety aspect, although its a nice bonus.

Sam, the theory behind this is called 'risk compensation' and its main proponent is John Adams. Have a look at his web-site:

http://www.john-adams.co.uk/

There is also some summarised info about risk compensation on

http://www.cyclehelmets.org/.