- 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
- Tubeless valves
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
news
Cyclist with earbuds - copyright Simon MacMichaelDutch study: Using headphones "Negatively affects perception of sounds crucial for safe cycling"
A study conducted in the Netherlands has concluded that cyclists who listen to music through headphones or talk on their mobile phones while riding their bikes may be putting themselves at risk.
Published in the Journal of Accident Analysis and Prevention, the study did, however, observe that when it came to teenage cyclists, there was no such correlation.
Its authors suggested that cyclists listening to music or talking on their phone in a country with less cycling infrastructure than the Netherlands might be more at risk.
The research, conducted via an internet survey of 2,249 cyclists split into three age groups –16–18 years, 30–40 and 65–70 – aimed to analyse:
1 – the auditory perception of traffic sounds, including the sounds of quiet (electric) cars
2 – the possible compensatory behaviours of cyclists who listen to music or talk on their mobile phones, and
3 – the possible contribution of listening to music and talking on the phone to cycling crashes and incidents.
It concluded: “Results show that listening to music and talking on the phone negatively affects perception of sounds crucial for safe cycling.
“However, taking into account the influence of confounding variables, no relationship was found between the frequency of listening to music or talking on the phone and the frequency of incidents among teenage cyclists.
“This may be due to cyclists’ compensating for the use of portable devices.”
The authors added: “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.”
The issue of cyclists wearing headphones is sometimes addressed at coroner’s inquests where the deceased was killed while riding a bike.
In an inquest held in December 2016 following the death of Emily Norton in Howden, East Yorkshire, the coroner said: "I cannot determine if she was on her iPhone listening with earphone at the time, but if she had been, it could have caused a distraction and could have contributed to the cause of the accident."
In response to that case, both the road safety charity RoSPA and campaign organisation Cycling UK said that they discourage cyclists from wearing headphones.
Kevin Clinton of RoSPA said: “Hearing is an important sense when cycling as it gives riders warning about the approach of nearby vehicles and an idea of their speed. We advise cyclists not to wear headphones when riding.”
Cycling UK’s Duncan Dollimore said: “Our view is that wearing headphones is inadvisable, particularly if listening at high volumes or with headphones that completely shut out sound, but the idea that headphone wearing cyclists are any more of a problem than headphone wearing pedestrians is not borne out by any evidence we have seen.”
> Video: Cyclist collides with headphone-wearing runner
Occasionally, the prospect of a ban on cyclists wearing headphones is floated, for example by Boris Johnson when he was Mayor of London, reacting to the deaths of several cyclists in the capital in late 2013.
> Government 'will not legislate' for Mayor of London's cyclist headphone ban
Many cyclists who choose not to wear headphones take the view that as vulnerable road users, they should avoid doing anything that might impair their awareness of the environment surrounding them.
But others maintain that they feel quite safe riding with them, and that a ban using headphones while riding would be akin to telling deaf people that they aren’t allowed to cycle.
Meanwhile, no-one talks about banning motorists from listening to music - something that can have fatal consequences for others.
> "Blaring music" meant driver didn't know he'd hit cyclist, court told
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Rome73 4 sec ago
'Meanwhile, the council says that the anti-cycle lane opponents’ suggested alternative route – through a nearby parkland – would mean a greater...
- Pub bike 1 hour 30 min ago
The owners of the private car park made reasonable attempts to contact Lime and ask them to remove the bikes that were fly-tipped on their property...
- Pub bike 1 hour 36 min ago
Could be for cyclists with congenitally long arms.
- mark1a 7 hours 18 min ago
I'll put you down as a no then.
- chrisonabike 9 hours 39 min ago
May need insurance, tax and a licence. No problem with the lights though.
- Hirsute 12 hours 26 min ago
If you can't see a %^$&ing large tractor what ^%$£"!*ing hope is there that you will see a cyclist ?...
- chrisonabike 12 hours 44 min ago
Well if you *can* interview the original riders at all surely they worked, at least?...
- David9694 13 hours 13 min ago
Live: Car plunges over wall and lands on beach rocks...
- brooksby 18 hours 26 min ago
And finally: I wonder how many of the "more than 3,000" signatures on that petition are actually locals, who live or work there (and are not just...
Add new comment
69 comments
Just watched the GCN show mentioning this 'study'.
Interestingly:
They cite that it doesn't affect younger people yet Matt Stephens rolls over this saying it doesn't matter. In that case the other points raised don't matter.
They then roll this into 'especially with an increase in quieter electric cars' - ban them then, or make them make a noise!
There's then a clip of Matt riding in a cycle lane, less than 10 seconds. Blocked by 2 vans.
What chance have we got when 'our own' don't see the idiocy!
Why do people get so uppity about this issue?
Surely the point of this survey is saying if you have an auditory distraction you are less likely to have a good perception in the bike?
I’m no deaf people expert but they don’t have music constantly playing in their heads being a distraction.
why can’t people accept there is maybe evidence that it’s possible more dangerous to do something than they perceive to be the case?
whilst i’m sure someone with one eye can still reasonably safely ride a bike, I don’t think anyone would willing ride a bike with one eye closed... we’ll actually possibly some people on here would, just to make a point!!!
there may be evidence, but this survey doesn't seem to be it.
People get uppity about it because it is yet another distraction from major issues that could significantly reduce the (already really quite low) risk to cyclists from motor vehicles, which are what really put people in danger.
they might also get uppity because the sort of half-baked conclusion that many people come to from this type of survey is that we should not cycle if we cannot hear probably, for whatever reason; that conclusion is not founded in any evidence that I know of, does not accord with my own experience, and goes against the principle that I am responsible for my own safety. I don't need other people trying to stop me doing things "for my own good".
No expert you say?!
Cyclists get uppity when all the known, effective strategies of improving cyclist safety are completely ignored and instead there seems to be a lot of focus on restricting cyclists' freedom by mandating helmets or outlawing headphones.
I'll accept the evidence if there is any, but this report was just based on people opinions rather than facts.
I reckon riding with one eye would be fine. Driving with only one eye is perfectly acceptable too. Depth perception is only really used within approx. 20 feet, so as long as you take extra care when close to other vehicles/objects, you should be fine.
Here's the official line on monocular vision: https://www.gov.uk/monocular-vision-and-driving
If it is a matter of cutting out the auditory cues then why isn't it an issue for the deaf? If someone with an impairment drives then the car is required to be adapted to compensate, there is nothing in this report regarding the adaptation of bikes (added mirrors?) that would be required.
If it is a matter of music (or whatever you listen to) being distracting then why isn't it an issue for those in charge of motor vehicles?
People have enough trouble walking with their music...I passed a couple clowns where it was so loud I could hear it on the bike.. cyclists are no better , just arrogant about it
Let’s face it you need all your senses on the road no matter what your mode might be. Plugging your ears has got to be the stupidest thing; you might as well put a blindfold on too.
If you need all your senses 'no latter what your mode might be', how come cars are made to be almost soundproof?
Let's face it, you're a troll who won't try and defend your easily-demolished comment.
I don't know about you, but I try not to use my sense of taste whilst cycling. A lot of vehicles are really dirty and I don't think people would appreciate me licking their vehicle.
Hearing is a more complex topic though. I definitely use my hearing a lot when cycling and use it to judge what's behind me or if a vehicle is changing speed. However, the question of whether it improves my safety is debatable as there's little that I can do about dangerous situations approaching from behind. Hearing can clue me in on not pulling out in front of vehicles, but it's safest to always look first.
I don't know. One of my club buddies claimed we were having a 'controlled' effort up the cat and fiddle, jumped off my wheel the last 100 metres (whilst I was taking pictures) and nabbed a PR!
That left a bad taste!
Yeah right on brother, the single most stupid thing you can do on a bike. Headphones. Yeah I'm with you. Headphones bad, the worst!
Oh, blindfolds you say. But I just destroyed all headphones. I feel silly now.
as I'm deaf does this mean I might as well blind myself too?
Where can I get one of these research jobs where I get paid for stating the bleeding obvious?!
I guess you would be able to produce the evidence out your arse same as the people offering up the 'evidence' here so you'd be well suited to it.
This is in the same realms of 'bleedin obvious' like efficacy of helmets, hi-vis and the existance of tooth fairies and santa
I just tried looking for the research, but it appears to be behind a paywall. However, the abstract make it seem like a pretty poor result. The data was just from an internet survey in which they asked cyclists' opinions on their ability to hear traffic noise and their opinion on how that affected their safety. So, the result is really that some age groups think that using headphones is more dangerous.
I'd be far more interested in actual accident rates rather than people's perceptions of them.
This evening, I had a counter-example of where being able to hear was worse for me. I was going along a shared-use path and was about to join the road where a "compulsory" cycle lane starts (and the shared-use path ends). I signalled right, could see a car behind, but it didn't seem dangerous, so I pulled to the right. The car then beeped aggressively at me which surprised me and made me wobble for an instant before shouting and gesticulating back. The car was then waiting to turn right behind another car, so I don't get what the driver's issue was.
If I had headphones on full blast, I wouldn't have even known that some idiot moton was beeping at me.
Good work in at least reading the abstract - I was assuming it was at least a proper bit of research, rather than just an opinion poll, which is what it sounds like from your description.
Seems to me there's a lot of piss-poor 'research' around, owing to the intense pressure on academics of all kinds to keep up their publication rate (on pain of losing their jobs). Not to mention more than a few journals which seem to be no better than vanity publishing.
Yep, and it's saved my ass a few times. They're going the same speed but engine pitch rises, so gearing down and might be preparing to turn. So I ease up and let them take the turn, and accellerate past the turn once the vehicle is safely out of the way.
I don't use headphones myself, as I pick up a lot of information about what's going on around me from my ears. And it's nice to be out in the open air enjoying the world, and hearing the sound of tyres on the road, and steady whirr of the chainset.
Did EU money pay for this waste of time.
Goes without saying.
I fail to see how hearing would have influenced the behaviour of these drivers the other day. I had earphones in but could hear all of them perfectly adequately. Being able to hear them didn't seem to affect them overtaking into oncoming traffic etc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_zzK_GoGJcc
I think it gives you some degree of awareness before doing a shoulder check but you'd have to be relatively daft to make an erratic move without the check anyway.
The only real benefit I can see is hearing that a car isn't braking for a roundabout or junction, maybe jumping a light on a hump back bridge. It possibly gives you a small chance of taking evasive action but again puts the 'blame' on the wrong road user and the risk must be in the 0.0000000000001%s
I think I might wear headphones--just the headphones--with no sounds coming through.
Hopefully this will discourage some stupid drivers from offering stupid comments as they drive by me, on the mistaken assumption that I can't hear the stupid stuff they shout.....yes, you know who you are, just three feet from my right ear, yeah?
If they don't make electric cars whoosh along with a futuristic noise then what's the point ?
A study has shown that undertaking studies on the bleedin' obvious is obviously not needed.
Just what I was thinking its not rocket science is?
Except it isn't that obvious... not to me. I don't see the danger.
Please explain what is obvious. .. beyond the fact that hearing will undoubtably be imparied... however what use is hearing in real terms to road safety?
The death of a woman riding a bike near Hull was highlighted in the news and the coroner made a complete guess at saying it was down to her having headphones on without a scrap of evidence. in fact the coroner made no attempt to seek why the HGV driver with excellent sight lines did not see the cyclist at all (his admittance) and why he cut the roundabout at speed or indeed if he was listening to music.
There was also the usual victim blaming because she hit her head and wasn't wearing a helmet despite the fact it was a neck injury that killed her.
Why are distractions in motors not brought up specifically in this case relating to music/sounds which are within a sealed environment and indeed that sealing up/sound proofing means the driver cannot hear what is going on around them?
Two tier system yet again!
Worse than the fact that they sound proof cars and put stereos in, many now pump agressive engine tones in so the driver thinks their car sounds nice and mean. I mean, WTF?
Just think when all the cars are electric and silent how peaceful the road will be.
I was passed by a Nissan Leaf the other day and I actually found it slightly disconcerting that all I could hear was the hiss of tyres on road...
Pages