Accident; analysis and prevention
-
While risk perception is a key factor influencing safety behavior, the academia lacks specific attention to the ways that workers perceive risk, and thus little is known about the mechanisms through which different risk perceptions influence safety behavior. Most previous research in the workplace safety domain argues that people tend to perceive risk based on rational formulations of risk criticality. However, individuals' emotions can be also useful in understanding their perceptions. ⋯ Furthermore, safety behavior among workers relied mainly on emotional perception but not rational calculations of risk. This research contributes to workplace safety research by highlighting the importance of integrating the emotional assessment of risk, especially when workers' risk perception and behavior are concerned. Suggested avenues for improving safety behavior through improvement in risk perception include being aware of the possibility of different ways of perceiving risk, promoting experience sharing and accident simulation, and uncovering risk information.
-
Assessment of collision risk between pedestrians and automobiles offers a powerful and informative tool in urban planning applications, and can be leveraged to inform proper placement of improvements and treatment projects to improve pedestrian safety. Such assessment can be performed using existing datasets of crashes, pedestrian counts, and automobile traffic flows to identify intersections or corridors characterized by elevated collision risks to pedestrians. ⋯ A sample of 488 intersections in Minneapolis were analyzed, and statistically-significant log-linear relationships between pedestrian traffic flows and the per-pedestrian crash risk were found, indicating the Safety In Numbers effect. Potential planning applications of this analysis framework towards improving pedestrian safety in urban environments are discussed.
-
As cycling-related injury rates are on the rise, there is a need to understand the long term outcomes of these patients in order to quantify the burden of injury and to inform injury prevention strategies. This study aimed to investigate predictors of return to work and functional recovery in a cohort of cyclists hospitalised for orthopaedic trauma from crashes occurring on-road. ⋯ Cyclists who collided with motor vehicles had worse outcomes compared to crashes with other impact counterparts and non-collision events. These findings provide support for reducing the potential for interaction between cyclists and motor vehicles.
-
Listening to music or talking on the phone while cycling as well as the growing number of quiet (electric) cars on the road can make the use of auditory cues challenging for cyclists. The present study examined to what extent and in which traffic situations traffic sounds are important for safe cycling. Furthermore, the study investigated the potential safety implications of limited auditory information caused by quiet (electric) cars and by cyclists listening to music or talking on the phone. ⋯ This may be due to cyclists' compensating for the use of portable devices. Listening to music or talking on the phone whilst cycling may still pose a risk in the absence of compensatory behaviour or in a traffic environment with less extensive and less safe cycling infrastructure than the Dutch setting. With the increasing number of quiet (electric) cars on the road, cyclists in the future may also need to compensate for the limited auditory input of these cars.
-
Many studies have found bicycle-motor vehicle crashes to be more likely on bidirectional cycle paths than on unidirectional cycle paths because drivers do not expect cyclists riding at the right side of the road. In this paper we discuss the hypothesis that opening all unidirectional cycle paths for cycle traffic in both directions prevent this lack of expectancy and accordingly improves cycling safety. A new national standard requires careful consideration because a reversal is difficult once cyclists are used to their new freedom of route choice. ⋯ Moreover, there are some indications that the likelihood of frontal crashes between cyclists increases. We reject the hypothesis that opening all unidirectional cycle paths for cycle traffic in both directions will improve cycle safety. We recommend more attention for mitigating measures given the widespread application of bidirectional cycle paths in the Netherlands.