- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Car turning into cyclist's path (YouTube).jpgNew research finds many drivers really don't "see" cyclists or motorbikers (+ video)
New research published by the The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society suggests that drivers often fail to “see” motorbikers – and by extension cyclists – even when they look right at them.
Planetsave reports lead author Kristen Pammer, a professor of psychology and associate dean of science at Australian National University, as saying: “When we are driving, there is a huge amount of sensory information that our brain must deal with.
“We can’t attend to everything, because this would consume enormous cognitive resources and take too much time. So our brain has to decide what information is most important. The frequency of LBFTS [looked but failed to see] crashes suggests to us a connection with how the brain filters out information.”
Invisible cyclists: Eye-tracking experiment finds drivers don't see more than 1 in 5 riders
Researchers asked 56 adults to look at photos showing routine driving situations from a driver’s perspective. Participants were asked to decide if the situations represented safe or unsafe driving conditions.
In the final photograph, researchers inserted an unexpected vehicle into the scene — either a taxi or a motorbike. Half didn’t notice, and of those who did, two thirds identified the taxi while less than a third identified the motorbike.
The uniformity illusion: peripheral vision study may help explain why drivers fail to see cyclists
“Motorcycles appear to be very low on the priority list for the brain when it is filtering information,” said Pammer. One can only wonder where cyclists might rank in such a hierarchy.
Failure to notice an unexpected object located in plain sight is termed ‘inattentional blindness’.
The best-known study demonstrating the phenomenon centred on this video.
In most groups, 50 per cent of subjects do not report seeing the gorilla.
Pammer and her coauthors believe their study highlights a need to encourage drivers to be more motorcycle-aware when learning to drive.
"By putting motorcyclists higher on the brain 'radar' of the driver, hopefully drivers will be more likely to see them. In the meantime, we need to be more vigilant, more active, and more conscious when driving."
Alex has written for more cricket publications than the rest of the road.cc team combined. Despite the apparent evidence of this picture, he doesn't especially like cake.
Latest Comments
- Boopop 0 sec ago
"remind cyclists that they are “subject to the same rules as motorists”." Are butter knife owners subject to the same rules as gun owners too?
- Velophaart_95 30 min 51 sec ago
Yeah; read Tom Allen's blog for his thoughts on the difference between Touring & Bikepacking......
- Oldfatgit 2 hours 20 min ago
Qidi ... was it just me, or did the guys with the system come over as right cocksockets?...
- Muddy Ford 3 hours 7 min ago
Police prioritising that which risks most harm to the public. Cyclists endangering pedestrians with minor injuries will get £50 fines from police...
- teckert 9 hours 23 min ago
You can see the effect of a 'way too late' opening of this comp, with my dismal results! Wrecked a good start to my season.
- IanMunro 10 hours 21 min ago
It was off my list of helmets worth buying as soon as I saw someone had named it "Game Changer".
- mark1a 11 hours 49 min ago
Looks valid to me although on a black Mercedes C Class. Last V5 issued 25th April (2 days ago) so maybe plate was being transferred.
- Sam3 15 hours 13 min ago
Asked for comment, a representative of the biker community said: "We are realigning our expenditure better reflect our strategic priorities and...
- Sam3 15 hours 17 min ago
So highly overpriced items such as "premium bike clothing" and overpriced "premium" bikes that no one NEEDS....suffer a disproportionate...
Add new comment
54 comments
Colours can have an effect, if you google "Advancing v Receding Colours" you will see what I mean!
I don't go with this, sorry. It's voluntary ignorance or stupidity; I have every license almost one can have, and it's diligence, caring and taking things seriously, something an absolute majority of drivers can't be bothered to possess. It's a personality thing, and most people have little care for anyone except themselves. Too much experience to accept this nonsense of an research.
I see the village idiots spouting crap agin. Lulz....
That video is a little unfair if being used to compare to driving. A driver should not be focusing all their attention on on single thing, like counting passes, but processing a huge amount of information, moreso when there is little light and little contrast. This should mean that driving is a full time activity, calling on all your attention.
I don't believe it's the way the brain functions, it's a question on how we choose to use our brain. And there's a lot going on around us to distract us. People don't concentrate on driving, people who don't concentrate
have accidentscause collisions. Colour doesn't come into it in the vast majority of cases, if you think it does, hand in your licence now.Only today I was thinking about the number of advertising hoardings and signwritten vans and how much of a distraction this could be over a quick glance to get the time off the mobile, only one of these activities will likely end up with a fine.
Give it a name and you justify it as a reasonable excuse IMHO.
Saw a cyclist today with brilliant blue lights on their rims. Impossible to miss and not to my taste, but the most effective way I have seen of making a bike visible.
Valbrona seems to have successfully deflected the conversation from one about why motorists don't pay full attention, to one about what colour clothing cyclists sometimes wear.
Not sure whether to applaud or cry.
New Research? This was news when I was in my 30s and I'm 70+ now. Heavily raked screen pillars don't help and can easily hide a bike in many circumstances. The original theory was that the brain gets used to registering anything that might hurt you and disregards non threats and generally a cyclist comes off worse in collision with a car.
Look once, look twice, look bike. I try to do this and the second look has surprised me on occasions and yes my eyesight was checked a month ago.
This is an interesting perspective from fighter pilot experience, on how the brain processes visual information, explaining why cyclists and motorcycles aren't seen. The advice on moving your head to see past door pillars is particularly pertinent in modern vehicles with wide pillars.
http://www.londoncyclist.co.uk/raf-pilot-teach-cyclists/
Thanks for posting this, you beat me to it. It was also published in the IAM magazine some years ago and it really does explain why we don’t see things when “scanning” with our eyes, the brain literally blanks out what you see when you sweep your eyes rapidly. The principles should be in the Highway Code and sent out with every driving licence as it if more people understood that they need to “look” differently it would prevent a lot of SMIDSY’s.
Full original article is also worth a read:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/elegi6k9amk8spw/1211%20Road%20Survival%20Guide...
Mick
Valbrona,I assume you are referring to the fact that lots of cyclists wear black.If you look properly at most tarmac you will see it is very pale grey and about as similar to jet black as it is to hi-viz colours.
The environment on a motorway is different as there aren't the buildings to contrast against so hi vis is a great option. Cyclists aren't allowed on motorways though....
And yet we see warning signs to be aware of construction workers while driving through roadworks. Even then, the flouresent clothing and reflective decals do not guarantee these workers safety.
They're safer wearing Hi-Viz than they would be with black or gray. Do you think they just wear bright colours for fun?
To get back to the original topic, if the gorilla had been wearing a Hi-viz jacket more people would have seen him.
I'll refer you to my other post. It doesn't make a jot what vulnerable road users wear. Motorists simply do not pay attention to what's happening around them. Once they are behind that wheel they focus only on the vehicle directly in front, what needs to be done that day and compelled to check their hand held device when it pings. next time you're a passenger in a car take note what is happening around you and then ask the driver what they noticed, you might be surprised at what they miss.
When I drive I not only look at the vehicle in front but several vehicles ahead. I'm also looking out for people stepping out off the pavement and possible vehicles at side streets as well as cyclists and equestrians. Driving is a skill that involves concentration at ALL times. That is why you need to be licensed. You are operating a large piece of powerful machinery in public.
It makes little difference what percautions people take. They will never be safe until motorists irradicate inattention and carelessness out of their driving routine.
but tarmac is still not the background I need to be contrasted against unless
a) I am already prone in the road
b) someone lands a helicopter on me
The problem in Britain isn't that "inattentional blindness" exists.
The problem is that the attitude and actions of a lot of road users, the media, the justice system, and the police continually assert that it is OK, and that injuring or killing cyclists is [to quote another Road.cc reader] acceptable collateral against the right to drive wherever or however they like.
Not surprised when so many cyclists wear clothing the same colour as asphalt.
This is about attention blindness. Lack of attention and the brain be overloaded with information at the same time. I t is not a debate on colour!
You seem to have lacked the attention to the detail in the article before posting
You are aware that the sky, buildings, trees, verges etc. are not made of asphalt and are in fact made of substances which usually contrast quite strongly with dark colours?
You're not?
What a surprise.
If the problem is that my clothing is the blending in with the "asphalt" then I fear that it is already too late as I'll have hit the deck! As long as I do not blend in with the red bricks, yellow stone and brown/green trees that are in the background while I am upright I think I'll be OK as long as anyone is looking.
Makes little odds on what people wear. The vast majority of motorists once behind the wheel switch to autopilot. Nice try on attempting a bunny trail though.
Which is exactly why they banned black or grey cars, they are literally invisible.
Anyway, as a white male I contrast beautifully with tarmac. Those awful dark skinned foreigners you dislike so much (especially female ones) will be wiped out. Perfect!
My friend was nearly killed (coma, parents told he would probably die) when a lady didn't see him as she put him all over her bonnet. The person travelling behind was also blind as they didn't see a cyclist they were approaching either. Frightening stuff. No prosecution as no witnesses and my mate can't remember a thing about it.
Pages