Under-reporting bicycle accidents to police in the COST TU1101 international survey: Cross-country comparisons and associated factors

Police crash reports are often the main source for official data in many countries. However, with the exception of fatal crashes, crashes are often underreported in a biased manner. Consequently, the countermeasures adopted according to them may be inefficient. In the case of bicycle crashes, this bias is most acute and it probably varies across countries, with some of them being more prone to reporting accidents to police than others. Assessing if this bias occurs and the size of it can be of great importance for evaluating the risks associated with bicycling. This study utilized data collected in the COST TU1101 action “Towards safer bicycling through optimization of bicycle helmets and usage”. The data came from an online survey that included questions related to bicyclists' attitudes, behaviour, cycling habits, accidents, and patterns of use of helmets. The survey was filled by 8655 bicyclists from 30 different countries. After applying various exclusion factors, 7015 questionnaires filled by adult cyclists from 17 countries, each with at least 100 valid responses, remained in our sample. The results showed that across all countries, an average of only 10% of all crashes were reported to the police, with a wide range among countries: from a minimum of 0.0% (Israel) and 2.6% (Croatia) to a maximum of a 35.0% (Germany). Some factors associated with the reporting levels were type of crash, type of vehicle involved, and injury severity. No relation was found between the likelihood of reporting and the cyclist's gender, age, educational level, marital status, being a parent, use of helmet, and type of bicycle. The significant under-reporting – including injury crashes that do not lead to hospitalization – justifies the use of self-report survey data for assessment of bicycling crash patterns as they relate to (1) crash risk issues such as location, infrastructure, cyclists' characteristics, and use of helmet and (2) strategic approaches to bicycle crash prevention and injury reduction.Fil: Shinar, D.. Ben Gurion University of the Negev; IsraelFil: Valero Mora, Pedro. Universidad de Valencia; EspañaFil: van Strijp Houtenbos, M.. Institute For Road Safety Research; Países BajosFil: Haworth, N.. Queensland University of Technology; AustraliaFil: Schramm, A.. Queensland University of Technology; AustraliaFil: de Bruyne, G.. Universiteit Antwerp; BélgicaFil: Cavallo, V.. No especifíca;Fil: Chliaoutakis, J.. No especifíca;Fil: Pereira Dias, Joao. Instituto Superior Tecnico; PortugalFil: Ferraro, Ottavia Eleonora. Universita Degli Studi Di Pavia; ItaliaFil: Fyhri, Aslak. No especifíca;Fil: Sajatovic, Anika Hursa. No especifíca;Fil: Kuklane, Kalev. Lund University; SueciaFil: Ledesma, Ruben Daniel. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Mar del Plata. Instituto de Psicología Básica, Aplicada y Tecnología. Universidad Nacional de Mar del Plata. Facultad de Psicología. Instituto de Psicología Básica, Aplicada y Tecnología.; ArgentinaFil: Calvé Mascarell, Oscar. Ben Gurion University of the Negev; IsraelFil: Morandi, A.. Universita Degli Studi Di Pavia; ItaliaFil: Muser, Markus. No especifíca;Fil: Otte, Diettmar. No especifíca;Fil: Papadakaki, M.. No especifíca;Fil: Sanmartín, J.. Universidad de Valencia; EspañaFil: Dulf, D.. No especifíca;Fil: Saplioglu, M.. No especifíca;Fil: Tzamalouka, Georgia. No especifíca

Under-reporting bicycle accidents to police in the COST TU1101 international survey: Cross-country comparisons and associated factors

Police crash reports are often the main source for official data in many countries. However, with the exception of fatal crashes, crashes are often underreported in a biased manner. Consequently, the countermeasures adopted according to them may be inefficient. In the case of bicycle crashes, this bias is most acute and it probably varies across countries, with some of them being more prone to reporting accidents to police than others. Assessing if this bias occurs and the size of it can be of great importance for evaluating the risks associated with bicycling. This study utilized data collected in the COST TU1101 action “Towards safer bicycling through optimization of bicycle helmets and usage”. The data came from an online survey that included questions related to bicyclists' attitudes, behaviour, cycling habits, accidents, and patterns of use of helmets. The survey was filled by 8655 bicyclists from 30 different countries. After applying various exclusion factors, 7015 questionnaires filled by adult cyclists from 17 countries, each with at least 100 valid responses, remained in our sample. The results showed that across all countries, an average of only 10% of all crashes were reported to the police, with a wide range among countries: from a minimum of 0.0% (Israel) and 2.6% (Croatia) to a maximum of a 35.0% (Germany). Some factors associated with the reporting levels were type of crash, type of vehicle involved, and injury severity. No relation was found between the likelihood of reporting and the cyclist's gender, age, educational level, marital status, being a parent, use of helmet, and type of bicycle. The significant under-reporting – including injury crashes that do not lead to hospitalization – justifies the use of self-report survey data for assessment of bicycling crash patterns as they relate to (1) crash risk issues such as location, infrastructure, cyclists' characteristics, and use of helmet and (2) strategic approaches to bicycle crash prevention and injury reduction.acceptedVersio

Final report of Working Group 2: Traffic psychology. A COST Action TU1101 / HOPE collaboration

1. Background The workgroup of Traffic Psychology is concerned with the social, behavioral, and perceptual aspects that are associated with use and non-use of bicycle helmets, in their various forms and under various cycling conditions. 2. Objectives The objectives of WG2 are to (1) share current knowledge among the people already working in the field, (2) suggest new ideas for research on and evaluation of the design of bicycle helmets, and (3) discuss options for funding of such research within the individual frameworks of the participants. 3. Areas for research include: 3.1. The patterns of use of helmets among different users: children, adults, and sports enthusiasts. 3.2. The use of helmets in different environments: rural roads, urban streets, and bike trails. 3.3. Concerns bicyclists have relative to their safety and convenience and the perceived impact of using helmets on comfort and convenience. 3.4. The benefit of helmets for enhancing visibility, and how variations in helmet design and colors affect daytime, nighttime, and dusktime visibility. 3.5. The role of helmets in the acceptance of city-wide pickup-and-drop-off bicycles. 3.6. The impact of helmets on visual search behaviour of bicyclists. 4. Activities The main activities of the WG2 members consisted of: 4.1. Sharing ideas at periodic meetings and in short-term scientific meetings (STSM). 4.2. Formulating a major cooperative study to be jointly conducted in the different environments/cultures/countries. 4.3. Developing research proposals to be submitted to funding organizations – in government and industry. 4.4. Promoting research in this area among graduate students and young Ph.D.’s and cooperating with other researchers in other institutions. 5. Outputs and products: The bulk of this report will consist of short summaries of the outputs listed below of activities conducted and products generated by the WG2 members in the course of the four years of the COST Action TU1101. The outputs are divided into the three categories listed below. 5.1. Multi-country survey of bicycle use, and attitude, and crash experience by adult bicyclists in 17 countries. 5.2. Short-term scientific meetings (STSMs). 5.3. Presentations, technical reports and scientific papers published by the WG members on cycling with particular reference to cycling safety and bicycle helmets. 5.4. Potential applications and implementation of WG2 members’ research

Why women do not use the helmet when riding a bicycle

Women seem to use the helmet when riding a bicycle less frequently than men. Two possible explanations for this behavior are that 1) it is less appalling to them because of lack of comfort or other reasons, or 2) they use bicycles in a more cautious way than men so they feel that they do not need the helmet as much. The present paper explores these two explanations in 5, 691 cyclists that responded to an online survey conducted in 17 countries as part of an EU COST project. Answers to questions related to the two aforementioned explanations were analyzed graphically and three questions that showed the most conspicuous differences between males and females were identified. These were: 'Helmets are a problem because they disturb your hair', 'I am a fast rider', and 'I am a skilled rider'. The responses to these three questions plus their interactions with the gender of the respondent were used as predictors of the proportion of helmet wear. The results showed that: 1) the three questions predicted the use of the helmet, 2) the interaction between gender and hair disturbance was not significant, and 3) the interactions between gender and being a fast cyclist and being a skilled rider were both statistically significant showing that women that regard themselves as slow riders or skillful riders use relatively less the helmet than men in similar conditions. © 2018 by Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES). All rights reserved