Development of German pedelec (and bicycle) accidents between 2012 and 2020

In the recent years, pedelecs (pedal electric cycles) have seen a massive growth. in ridership. In 2013, around 1.3 million e-bilces were on German roads, while in 2020, this number was already at 8.5 million (with about 99% of the e-bikes being pedelecs). The rapid spread of pedelecs has given rise to concerns for road safety, especially due to the fact that riders of electric bicycles reach higher speeds. Indeed, some studies have reported that pedelec riders suffer from more severe crashes than users of conventional bikes. However, the highly dynamic development in pedelec ownership and use might cast some doubts on the long term validity of investigations of pedelec accidents and their characteristics that have to rely on data collected over shorter periods of time. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate pedelec accidents and their characterutics over several years in a longitudinal fashion. and compare them to accidents involving cyclists, tobe able to identify trends, and to clarify whether such trends are specifiic to pedelecs. [From: Introduction

Different but also alike? lngroup-outgroup phenomena among cyclists and e-scooter riders.

Against the background of an increasing number of cyclists sharing the infrastructure with an also rising number of e-scooter riders in Germany, the question of considerate coexistence among both modes of transportation, especially on shared infrastructure (on- or off-road) arises. In various contexts (e.g. work, education), studies have shown that social identity has an impact on how members of an ingroup ('us') and outgroup (''them') are perceived. These studies are based on social identity theory, which postulates members of the ingroup are more likely to be favored and members of the outgroup are more likely discriminated and stereotyped. This ingroup favorism or outgroup discrimination can refer to attitudes, cognition, and behavior. Initial research in the traffic context by, on which the present study builds, suggests that social identity also plays a role in traffic. Apart from that, research on social identity in traffic is scarce. The aim of the study is to determine whether the role as cyclist or e-scooter rider in traffic can serve as social identity, and subsequently whether ingroup-outgroup phenomena, such as ingroup favorism and effects of outgroup discrimination can be observed. [from Introduction

Real-World lnteractions between Cyclists and Automated Vehicles - A Wizard-of-Oz Experiment

The introduction of automated vehicles (AVs) changes the way road users interact and communicate. In AVs, informal communication such as eye contact or gestures with other road users is omitted. Because interaction should still be objectively and subjectively safe, many studies are currently focusing on the communication processes between (automated) vehicles and predominantly vulnerable road users (VRUs), like pedestrians and cyclists [1 ]. These road users are highly at risk of being fatally injured in road traffic accidents, with the WHO reporting pedestrians and cyclists account for 32 % of all fatalities in Europe [2].... This shows why it is so important to study the interaction processes between VRUs, such as cyclists, and A Vs in real traffic. The algorithms of the A Vs must be able to anticipate the behavior of VRUs and thus ensure a subjectively and objectively safe interaction (cyclists should feel and be safe a.round them). This is the aim of the present study. How do cyclists behave when they encounter an apparent A V for the first time? How do they assess the situation and on what basis do they decide to cross? To answer these questions, a field study will take place in Munich in the summer of 2022, in which such interactions will be observed and the cyclists will be interviewed afterward. The study takes place within the TEMPUS project funded by the BMDV (German Federal Ministry for Digital and Transport). [From: Introduction

lmportance of safety and road surface for route choice when riding shared e-scooters vs. bicycles

The rise of micromobility, most notably electric standing scooters (e-scooters), has resulted in new challenges for traffic planning and road safety. One such issue is the fact that in most European countries, e-scooter users are obliged to ride their vehicle on cycling infrastructure and thereby share this infrastructure with bicyclists. This increases the use of and, subsequently, demand for bicycle lanes, which is an obvious challenge for transport planning. However, for adequate planning and construction of cycling infrastructure, information on route choice behavior of bicyclists and e-scooter users and its influencing factors is necessary. While research on bicyclists' route choice is well advanced, research on e-scooter riders is still in its infancy. For bicyclists, the presence of bicycle facilities, traffic volume, and travel time are among others particularly important for route choice. However, the question arises whether this also applies to e-scooter riders as vehicle dynamics are different and riders are, at least for now, less skilled due to lack of training and exposition. In order to fill this research gap, we aimed to analyze the determinants for route choice of e-scooter users in comparison to bicyclists in a field study. [from Introduction

Development of German pedelec (and bicycle) accidents between 2012 and 2020

In the recent years, pedelecs (pedal electric cycles) have seen a massive growth. in ridership. In 2013, around 1.3 million e-bilces were on German roads, while in 2020, this number was already at 8.5 million (with about 99% of the e-bikes being pedelecs). The rapid spread of pedelecs has given rise to concerns for road safety, especially due to the fact that riders of electric bicycles reach higher speeds. Indeed, some studies have reported that pedelec riders suffer from more severe crashes than users of conventional bikes. However, the highly dynamic development in pedelec ownership and use might cast some doubts on the long term validity of investigations of pedelec accidents and their characteristics that have to rely on data collected over shorter periods of time. Therefore, the aim of this study was to investigate pedelec accidents and their characterutics over several years in a longitudinal fashion. and compare them to accidents involving cyclists, tobe able to identify trends, and to clarify whether such trends are specifiic to pedelecs. [From: Introduction

Different but also alike? lngroup-outgroup phenomena among cyclists and e-scooter riders.

Against the background of an increasing number of cyclists sharing the infrastructure with an also rising number of e-scooter riders in Germany, the question of considerate coexistence among both modes of transportation, especially on shared infrastructure (on- or off-road) arises. In various contexts (e.g. work, education), studies have shown that social identity has an impact on how members of an ingroup ('us') and outgroup (''them') are perceived. These studies are based on social identity theory, which postulates members of the ingroup are more likely to be favored and members of the outgroup are more likely discriminated and stereotyped. This ingroup favorism or outgroup discrimination can refer to attitudes, cognition, and behavior. Initial research in the traffic context by, on which the present study builds, suggests that social identity also plays a role in traffic. Apart from that, research on social identity in traffic is scarce. The aim of the study is to determine whether the role as cyclist or e-scooter rider in traffic can serve as social identity, and subsequently whether ingroup-outgroup phenomena, such as ingroup favorism and effects of outgroup discrimination can be observed. [from Introduction

Real-World lnteractions between Cyclists and Automated Vehicles - A Wizard-of-Oz Experiment

The introduction of automated vehicles (AVs) changes the way road users interact and communicate. In AVs, informal communication such as eye contact or gestures with other road users is omitted. Because interaction should still be objectively and subjectively safe, many studies are currently focusing on the communication processes between (automated) vehicles and predominantly vulnerable road users (VRUs), like pedestrians and cyclists [1 ]. These road users are highly at risk of being fatally injured in road traffic accidents, with the WHO reporting pedestrians and cyclists account for 32 % of all fatalities in Europe [2].... This shows why it is so important to study the interaction processes between VRUs, such as cyclists, and A Vs in real traffic. The algorithms of the A Vs must be able to anticipate the behavior of VRUs and thus ensure a subjectively and objectively safe interaction (cyclists should feel and be safe a.round them). This is the aim of the present study. How do cyclists behave when they encounter an apparent A V for the first time? How do they assess the situation and on what basis do they decide to cross? To answer these questions, a field study will take place in Munich in the summer of 2022, in which such interactions will be observed and the cyclists will be interviewed afterward. The study takes place within the TEMPUS project funded by the BMDV (German Federal Ministry for Digital and Transport). [From: Introduction

lmportance of safety and road surface for route choice when riding shared e-scooters vs. bicycles

The rise of micromobility, most notably electric standing scooters (e-scooters), has resulted in new challenges for traffic planning and road safety. One such issue is the fact that in most European countries, e-scooter users are obliged to ride their vehicle on cycling infrastructure and thereby share this infrastructure with bicyclists. This increases the use of and, subsequently, demand for bicycle lanes, which is an obvious challenge for transport planning. However, for adequate planning and construction of cycling infrastructure, information on route choice behavior of bicyclists and e-scooter users and its influencing factors is necessary. While research on bicyclists' route choice is well advanced, research on e-scooter riders is still in its infancy. For bicyclists, the presence of bicycle facilities, traffic volume, and travel time are among others particularly important for route choice. However, the question arises whether this also applies to e-scooter riders as vehicle dynamics are different and riders are, at least for now, less skilled due to lack of training and exposition. In order to fill this research gap, we aimed to analyze the determinants for route choice of e-scooter users in comparison to bicyclists in a field study. [from Introduction