The Great Flouro Fallacy

[wombatK]

Not sure that anyone will convince me soon that riding in all black is a good idea, or that I support the flouro fallacy argument, but there is some good research being reported... The Great Flouro Fallacy

[Leaf T]

Making us change our clothes for the ease of motorists only encourages laziness in drivers. Well, perhaps most of the time. I'll usually wear a vest on busy roads or in miserable weather.

[bigfriendlyvegan]

Those studies provide good evidence that people in charge of several hundred kilograms of machine moving at speed may not be the safe operators they think they are. Bring on the self-driving cars.

[trailgumby]

Finally, what military aviation has known for decades is starting to trickle down into civil planning and road safety:

If you ain't looking for it, you don't see it.

[duncanm]

If you ain't looking for it, you don't see it.

yup -- SMIDSY is mostly SMIWL

[Uncle Just]

I'm sure many celiacs would disagree but for me this one rings true...The Great Fluoro fallacy.

[DavidS]

Yep, doesn't matter how visible something is, if they don't look they won't see.

I'll keep riding in my non-flouro cycling clothes and use powerful lights at night.

Another aspect of the article was interesting too. Something we all no doubt knew, which is that the more bikes on the road, the more drivers will look for bikes and the safer it is for cyclists. So, I suppose it would be a good idea not to introduce laws which discourage cycling, that might actually make it safer. Would seem a better approach than introducing large fines for cyclists (discouraging) or MHLs (proven to reduce cyclist number).

DS

[Mulger bill]

When everybody's in HiViz then nobody's in HiViz, you have to stand out to be noticed.

I prefer to stand out by riding in a place and manner that puts my in a place where smokeboxers expect to see something.
It's also a good idea to move a little unpredictably when it can be done safely.

One bit of kit I'll always have to hand when things get grey tho is my reflective ankle strap. That motion stands out like the proverbial.

[trailgumby]

When everybody's in HiViz then nobody's in HiViz, you have to stand out to be noticed.

I prefer to stand out by riding in a place and manner that puts my in a place where smokeboxers expect to see something.
It's also a good idea to move a little unpredictably when it can be done safely.

One bit of kit I'll always have to hand when things get grey tho is my reflective ankle strap. That motion stands out like the proverbial.

The heels of all my shoes have a patch of that stuff, and my winter tights have large patches of it.They're branded "Flashlight" for a reason

Doesn't stop the punishment passers though

[duncanm]

The one thing that has noticeably worked for me is running front (and rear) flashers at all times.

[find_bruce]

When everybody's in HiViz then nobody's in HiViz, you have to stand out to be noticed.

I prefer to stand out by riding in a place and manner that puts my in a place where smokeboxers expect to see something.
It's also a good idea to move a little unpredictably when it can be done safely.

One bit of kit I'll always have to hand when things get grey tho is my reflective ankle strap. That motion stands out like the proverbial.

Yep, its "the Homer" all over - the ball on your antenna so you can find your car - every car should have one.

[BianchiCam]

Well judging by some of the woefully ignorant and bigoted comments on my Facebook page. There are those that simply do not, despite how many rules and laws you throw at them that even consider 'cyclists' to be human. The fact you are on 'their' roads (and not abiding by their (assumed) rules) that you deserve everything you get. Makes for very sobering reading indeed.
Wearing bright colours imo does bugger all for some of our 'licenced brethren'

[exadios]

This is not a motorist moral problem. It is a training problem. It is not good enough for driving schools and examiners to assume that people can see. It is necessary to teach people how to look and for this to be tested.

[OldBloke]

On Facebook, Metro Cycles has a link to this article which is worth reading:
http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/bike- ... qiwce.html

[Thoglette]

The one thing that has noticeably worked for me is running front (and rear) flashers at all times.

I'll see your anecdote and raise you a bad dose of confirmation bias. (Translation: mostly bollocks, but as long as _you_ feel happier)

It is necessary to teach people how to look and for this to be tested.

Hear, hear!

p.s. go and read up on what's known as inattention blindness.

p.p.s. If you can't be bothered, count the passes in this video https://youtu.be/vJG698U2Mvo. (Daniels and Chabris 1999)

p.p.p.s Yes, if you make as much blue-and-red flashing as a police car a proportion of drivers are less likely to totally ignore you. But, even before pokemon, this wasn't fool proof

[Xplora]

It is necessary to teach people how to look and for this to be tested.

Did you read the article? IT DOES NOT WORK. People are incapable of the task.

You can teach people to be extra careful of opening their door and always check for cyclists and cars and buses etc, but they will still make mistakes. A lot. This is because people do not engage their brains to manage their environment more than necessary. Necessary for THEM, not necessary for us.

The smart play is to teach people to ride away from doors (because you don't drive that close either) and teach drivers that they are expected to drive at the speed limit but they have an obligation to slow down when there is slower traffic in front of them. People make mistakes, and no amount of training can prevent all risk.

[exadios]

It is necessary to teach people how to look and for this to be tested.

Did you read the article? IT DOES NOT WORK. People are incapable of the task.

You can teach people to be extra careful of opening their door and always check for cyclists and cars and buses etc, but they will still make mistakes. A lot. This is because people do not engage their brains to manage their environment more than necessary. Necessary for THEM, not necessary for us.

The smart play is to teach people to ride away from doors (because you don't drive that close either) and teach drivers that they are expected to drive at the speed limit but they have an obligation to slow down when there is slower traffic in front of them. People make mistakes, and no amount of training can prevent all risk.

Yes, I comprehended the article. It simply states that those who have not been trained how to scan cannot see the obvious.

I did not say that people should be taught that they should look but that they should be trained how to look. There is a distinction.

[Xplora]

Given an enormous segment of the population fails these basic perception tests, it's not going to happen.

Defensive driving principles have succeeded because they expect failure.

[yugyug]

I'm sure many celiacs would disagree but for me this one rings true...The Great Fluoro fallacy.

Ha. I think your comment in this thread has gone about as unnoticed as a gorilla on a basketball court...

[duncanm]

The one thing that has noticeably worked for me is running front (and rear) flashers at all times.

I'll see your anecdote and raise you a bad dose of confirmation bias. (Translation: mostly bollocks, but as long as _you_ feel happier)

Please note my bolding.

You may consider it anecdotal, but if I could be bothered running flashers and not on alternate days and counting them, there would be a statistically significant difference in the number of SMIDSYs I had.

[duncanm]

You all may want to read the alternate view, too..

Kwan and Mapstone, 2004: Visibility aids for pedestrians and cyclists: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

3.1. Daytime visibility
There were 12 trials which compared the effectiveness of daytime visibility aids (Cole and Hughes, 1984; Hughes and
Cole, 1986; Hanson and Dickson, 1963; Michon et al., 1969; Turner et al., 1997; Watts, 1980; Watts, 1984a; Zwahlen
and Vel, 1994; Zwahlen and Schnell, 1997) involving 294 participants. Fluorescent colours improved detection and recognition distance, frequency and reaction time in eight trials (Cole and Hughes, 1984; Hughes and Cole, 1986; Hanson and Dickson, 1963; Michon et al., 1969; Turner et al., 1997; Watts, 1984a; Zwahlen and Vel, 1994; Zwahlen and Schnell, 1997) and only failed to increase detection in one trial (Watts, 1980).

[gorilla monsoon]

At the risk of getting howled down and purely from a personal perspective, I will always see hi-viz before I see anything else and that includes flashing lights. But that's just me.

[human909]

A big part of it is angle of approach and lighting conditions. From behind I've seen plenty of poor bicycle lights where RETROREFLECTIVE hi-vis is clearly more visible than a dull light. A good flashing light though should be able to be seen and recognised to be a cyclists from several hundred meters. Hi-vis won't convey the cyclist message and could be confused with other road clutter.

Overall all high vis can help. But it will still often not compensate for the bigger issue of people simply not looking for cyclists. This morning, daylight, a truck initially moved to turn right in front of me. He was looking for cars clear and simply. He saw me at the last minute while I was doing wavey "hello I'm here motions".... (I had plenty of room to take action had he not seen me.)

I prefer to stand out by riding in a place and manner that puts my in a place where smokeboxers expect to see something.

This is what I do. And mostly I do find inner city Melbourne drivers are good now. Bit different on the weekends or in the 'burbs...

[Scott_C]

You all may want to read the alternate view, too..

Kwan and Mapstone, 2004: Visibility aids for pedestrians and cyclists: a systematic review of randomised controlled trials

Of note, from this alternative study:

We did not find any randomised controlled trials or controlled before-and-after trials which compared the effect of visibility aids on the occurrence of pedestrian and cyclist–motor vehicle collision. The effect of visibility aids on pedestrian and cyclist safety therefore remains unknown

One of the studies that is the topic of the news article did look at the effect of visibility on collisions and found no link between increased visibility and whether or not a cyclist is involved in a collision. Although this study was undertaken in a rural area of NZ where there would be little visual clutter in the first place.

[wombatK]

Of note, from this alternative study:

We did not find any randomised controlled trials or controlled before-and-after trials which compared the effect of visibility aids on the occurrence of pedestrian and cyclist–motor vehicle collision. The effect of visibility aids on pedestrian and cyclist safety therefore remains unknown

One of the studies that is the topic of the news article did look at the effect of visibility on collisions and found no link between increased visibility and whether or not a cyclist is involved in a collision. Although this study was undertaken in a rural area of NZ where there would be little visual clutter in the first place.

It gets a bit difficult to do a randomised controlled trial when there is possibly fatal outcomes involved. These are situations where a lower level of evidence has to be accepted.

It's a significant point that the study was done in a rural area, where it's not as challenging visually for motorists.

Yet when it comes to roadside worker safety, it would be a pretty foolhardly supervisor who didn't enforce hi-vis clothing (or the higher grade reflective material at night) for the workers. My practical experience over many years of driving is that workers in such clothing are much easier to see and avoid than ones dressed in dark clothing. And that applies equally in the city and out on lonely country roads.

The only reservation I've had is a few recent instance of nightworks on the M5 motorway where there were so many bright and flashing lights and reflective clothing surfaces, it was difficult to discern where it was safe to drive. It was almost like the aim was to bamboozle or dedazzle drivers into slowing to a crawl. In the long run, that'll come back to bight them -- it only takes one driver who freaks out and swerves or accelerates instead of hitting the brakes when blinded or bamboozled.

For the same reason, it's important to make sure your high-powered led lights aren't going to blind oncoming drivers too.