| 1. |
- Shinar, David, et al.
(författare)
-
Final report of Working Group 2: Traffic psychology. A COST Action TU1101 / HOPE collaboration
- 2015
-
Rapport (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- 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.
|
|
| 2. |
- Shinar, David, et al.
(författare)
-
Reporting bicycle accidents to police in the COST TU1101 survey data base: Cross-country comparisons and associated factors
- 2016
-
Ingår i: ; , s. 9-9
-
Konferensbidrag (refereegranskat)abstract
- Police crash reports are often the main source for official data in many countries. However, police sampling and data are known to be subject to bias, making the countermeasures adopted according to them possibly 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. The following paper utilizes data collected in the COST TU1101 action. The data came from an online survey that included questions related with bicyclists' attitudes, accidents, and pattern of use of helmets. An average of only 10% of all crashes were reported to the police (minimum of 0.0% Israel and 3.37% Greece to a maximum of a 30% of Germany). Some factors associated with the reporting level were: type of crash, type of vehicle and injury severity. Finally, no relation was found between the likelihood of reporting and the cyclist's gender, age, use of helmet, and type of bicycle. The significant under-reporting justifies the use of survey data for assessment of bicycling crash patterns as they relate to crash risk issues such as location, cyclists' characteristics, and use of helmet and strategic approaches to bicycle crash prevention and injury reduction, which are discussed in the paper.
|
|
| 3. |
- Shinar, David, et al.
(författare)
-
Under-reporting bicycle accidents to police in the COST TU1101 international survey: Cross-country comparisons and associated factors
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Accident Analysis and Prevention. - : Elsevier BV. - 0001-4575. ; 110, s. 177-186
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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.
|
|
| 4. |
- Warner, Henriette Wallén, et al.
(författare)
-
Cross-cultural comparison of drivers’ tendency to commit different aberrant driving behaviours
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Transportation Research Part F. - 1369-8478 .- 1873-5517. ; 14:5, s. 390-399
-
Tidskriftsartikel (övrigt vetenskapligt/konstnärligt)abstract
- The first aim of the present study was to identify key items which are rated differently by drivers from Finland, Sweden, Greece and Turkey. The second aim was to examine how these key items relate to drivers’ self-reported accident involvement. Similar comparisons have previously been conducted in Europe but these have only included items classified as violations and errors, but not lapses. A sample of Finnish (N = 200), Swedish (N = 200), Greek (N = 200) and Turkish (N = 200) drivers completed the driver behaviour questionnaire (DBQ) and reported their accident involvement during the previous 3 years. The results showed that nine key items (which drivers from different countries rated differently) could be identified. These items included two aggressive violations, four ordinary violations, three lapses, but no errors. Out of these nine items, five items (Become angered by a certain type of driver and indicate your hostility by whatever means you can, Disregard the speed limit on a motorway, Overtake a slow driver on the inside, Pull out of a junction so far that the driver with right of way has to stop and let you out and Get into the wrong lane approaching a roundabout or a junction) could explain differences in drivers’ self-reported yearly accident involvement when all four countries were taken together. At the same time, none of the items could explain differences in self-reported yearly accident involvement in Finland and Sweden while one of the items (Overtake a slow driver on the inside) could explain differences in self-reported yearly accident involvement in Greece and two of the items (Become angered by a certain type of driver and indicate your hostility by whatever means you can and Disregard the speed limit on a residential road) could explain differences in self-reported yearly accident involvement in Turkey. This shows that different countries have different problems with regard to aberrant driving behaviours which need to be taken into account when promoting traffic safety interventions and the driver behaviour questionnaire (DBQ) can be used to diagnose risk areas and to better inform road safety practitioners within and between countries.
|
|
