Center for Cognitive Science, Freiburg University, Hebelstr. 10, 79104 Freiburg, Germany.
Center for Cognitive Science, Freiburg University, Hebelstr. 10, 79104 Freiburg, Germany.
Accid Anal Prev. 2020 Jul;142:105584. doi: 10.1016/j.aap.2020.105584. Epub 2020 May 20.
Urban planners frequently neglect the role of subjective risk perception during urban cycling. Several findings suggest a complex relationship between the risk of being involved in a crash and the subjective anticipation of this risk.
We investigate the relation of objective risks (operationalized through crashes involving cyclists) and subjective risk perception (operationalized through citizens' reports in a crowdsourcing project) in a medium-sized German city. Using GIS methods, these datasets are linked to various infrastructure and traffic properties that have been found relevant for cycling safety.
Despite a generally high alignment of objective and subjective risk, our findings highlight that the subjective risk perception at a given location can deviate significantly from the actual crash risk. For example, the subjective perception of high risk on one-way streets with bikeways in opposing direction is not matched by a high level of objective risk. Vice versa, some rather dangerous situations (e.g., tram stops) are not perceived as particularly dangerous.
Understanding why and where cyclists over- or underestimate the actual crash risk may provide a foundation for the design of safer cycling infrastructures, as well as for promoting cycling as a comfortable mode of transportation.
城市规划者在城市自行车出行规划中经常忽略主观风险感知的作用。有几项研究结果表明，涉及事故的风险与对这种风险的主观预期之间存在复杂的关系。
我们在一个德国中等城市调查了客观风险（通过涉及自行车的事故来实施）和主观风险感知（通过众包项目中的公民报告来实施）之间的关系。使用 GIS 方法，将这些数据集与已发现与自行车安全相关的各种基础设施和交通特性联系起来。
尽管客观风险和主观风险总体上高度一致，但我们的研究结果强调，在给定地点的主观风险感知可能与实际的事故风险存在显著差异。例如，在自行车道相反方向的单向街道上，主观上认为风险很高，但实际上并没有很高的客观风险。反之，一些相当危险的情况（例如，有轨电车车站）并不被认为是特别危险的。
了解为什么和在哪里骑自行车的人会过高或过低估计实际的事故风险，可以为设计更安全的自行车基础设施以及促进自行车作为一种舒适的交通方式提供基础。
