John in CR said:
There's no doubt that it's lots of little things that add up to that result such as the safer feeling of the rider changing riding behavior, motorists treating helmeted vs bare headed riders differently (the UK study showed cars getting full meter closer to those with helmets), restricted vision and hearing, etc.
No, that's not what that study showed. First of all, the study didn't have riders, it had one rider and tests were taken on two different routes in the UK. Second, the study did NOT show that cars got a full meter closer. What is showed was that when cars were a meter or more from the cyclist, they were about 3-4 inches closer when the cyclist wore a helmet. It's a curious thing to find, but it has zero impact on safety since a gap of a meter is quite safe. When cars passed closer than a meter, the 3-4 inch closer tendency disappeared.
Of course, you can choose to look at the data differently and there are criticisms of this "one meter or more" analysis. But regardless, the average pass of the helmeted rider was 8.5 cm, or less than four inches closer, not one meter closer. You'd have to be better versed in statistics than I am to tease out the significance of this, but given that the vast majority of the passes were over a meter away, it seems clear that this closer passing tendency is almost always of no real significance. In other words, in this study on these two roads in the UK with this rider and his variations in dress, wearing a helmet did result is slightly closer passes. Whether that affects the rider's safety is wide open to interpretation and debate. But given that the overwhelming majority of passes gave the rider a full meter of distance, I don't think it means much. The good news is that so many riders gave such a wide berth.
It is a shame that this excellent study (done in 2007 - and before the smart phone epidemic) is so routinely misrepresented. It is also a shame that this same kind of test hasn't been made elsewhere or done more recently given the changes in driver behavior that seem apparent. But however you interpret the study results, it makes no sense to generalize from it in the absence of seeing the same pattern repeated in other studies in other countries and locations.
https://psyarxiv.com/nxw2k
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0075424
Even if the study results were as you said, it would still be questionable to rely on one study from a foreign country.
John in CR said:
When the law changed here I can personally attest to the fact that my brain felt safer with the protection of a helmet, and my average speeds went up until I made a conscious effort to avoid it, but even now knowing the effect in the rare event that I end up lidless I feel more exposed and make extra effort in terms of being careful.
I agree that feeling safer can affect behavior. But I've been wearing a helmet since the '80s. I use the strapping on of my helmet as a reminder of how little physical protection I have.
John in CR said:
We've tried a couple of times with very limited success to have discussions about how best to achieve that, but I'm always game for that kind of thread, and I think I have some specifics for consideration. Hopefully others can offer pointers I haven't considered.
I try to do everything practical to increase my visibility to motorist while also assuming that they can't see me. Dayglo shirts and now socks. Very bright headlight day and night. Additional blinking headlight during the day. highly visible rear red LED array (dozens) day and night. Blinking marker lights for night riding and a dayglo shirt with reflective stripes. (OSHA style construction worker shirt). I try to consistently act as though motorists do not see me until and unless they do something positive that assures me I've been seen. I could probably get more rigorous and discriminating in what I accept as being a positive indication that I've been seen. I constantly remind myself that it
makes no sense to be in a rush if you are commuting by bicycle. It's a given that this isn't the fastest way (at least that's the case where I ride). I also remind myself that I have a motor to help get me back up to speed. So precautionary slowing or stopping aren't really a big deal. I can afford to take my time. I plan routes to use low speed roads (35 mph or less is the target) that have bicycle lanes as much as possible. I'll choose slow sidewalk riding (if available) if traffic conditions seem too hazardous or risky. Gotta ride slow on sidewalks given the problem of cars crossing sidewalks without looking.