Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorHøye, Alena
dc.contributor.authorJohansson, Ole Jørgen
dc.contributor.authorHesjevoll, Ingeborg Storesund
dc.coverage.spatialNorwayen_US
dc.date.accessioned2021-07-13T11:29:00Z
dc.date.available2021-07-13T11:29:00Z
dc.date.created2020-07-21T12:43:41Z
dc.date.issued2020-06-09
dc.identifier.citationTransportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour. 2020, 72 (July), 117-132.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1369-8478
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/11250/2764276
dc.description.abstractThe present study has investigated relationships between cyclists’ safety equipment use, crash involvement, and other safety relevant behavior. The main focus is on relationships that indicate either behavioral adaptation (safety equipment use leads to riskier behavior) or precautionary behavior (safety equipment is used for cycling in risky situations). Three consecutive surveys were conducted in 2015, 2016, and 2017 years among 650 Norwegian cyclists. Most items were dichotomized and analyzed with logistic regression models. In contrast to the behavioral adaptation hypothesis, regular use of safety equipment (bicycle lights, high-visibility clothing, and helmets) was found to be negatively related to some types of high-risk behavior (listening to music and taking chances while cycling). Regular use of bicycle lights and high-visibility clothing is also negatively related to collision involvement. Safety equipment use was found to be positively related to regular winter cycling and cycling in mixed traffic (not on sidewalks), and it is most likely used as a precautionary measure in such situations. Some cyclists learn from crash involvement by starting to use safety equipment after a crash, but the results do not indicate that crash involvement deters from cycling. The main conclusion from the study is that recommending, promoting or even mandating safety equipment for cyclists can be expected to improve safety and that behavioral adaptation is not likely to occur, at least not to an extent that will outweigh the positive safety effects. The results do not support reservations against the use of “sporty” (well-equipped) models in campaigns for promoting cycling.en_US
dc.language.isoengen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rightsNavngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.no*
dc.titleSafety equipment use and crash involvement among cyclists – Behavioral adaptation, precaution or learning?en_US
dc.typePeer revieweden_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.rights.holder© 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.en_US
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionen_US
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextpreprint
cristin.qualitycode1
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.trf.2020.05.002
dc.identifier.cristin1820025
dc.source.journalTransportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviouren_US
dc.source.volume72en_US
dc.source.issueJulyen_US
dc.source.pagenumber117-132en_US


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel

Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal
Med mindre annet er angitt, så er denne innførselen lisensiert som Navngivelse 4.0 Internasjonal