New research finds many drivers really don't "see" cyclists or motorbikers (+ video)

In my experience, cyclists are not on some drivers' radar screen.

They are looking for motor vehicles that are a danger to them, which cyclists arn't - and that's why they are not noticed. They look straight through you.

But its still driving without due care and attention.

Good to see so many people who are justifiably fed up with the victim-blaming crap that gets chucked at cyclists (and also pedestrians, by the way).

The bottom line is that mtorists CAN "see" cyclists and other road users if they want to. Too mnay just can't be arsed.

It is also extremely important that we understand the negative role the "road safety" industry has played in shifting the burden of responsibility away from drivers by pushing for hi-viz etc.

See

http://rdrf.org.uk/2013/11/03/hi-viz-for-cyclists-and-pedestrians-the-ev...

http://rdrf.org.uk/2013/11/01/hi-viz-for-pedestrians-and-cyclists-and-th...

http://rdrf.org.uk/2013/10/31/hi-viz-for-cyclists-and-pedestrians-sensib...

http://rdrf.org.uk/2011/06/09/of-slutwalks-and-hi-viz-the-politics-of-vi...

http://rdrf.org.uk/2012/03/01/sorry-mate/

on this subject

I can only recollect not "seeing" a cyclist on 3 occasions

1) While walking towards a car reversing out of a car park, I stopped and waited. Cyclist coming from other direction raced along car park, and swerved aroubd back of car without slowing down. Driver had to brake sharply. Maybe cyclist could see roof of car from his angle, certainly the back of it moving out - but driver's view blocked by the car she was parked next to.

2) Dusk on a dull day, Newhall st. Birmingham - car emerges from side turning, driver peering around parked cars. Black clad cyclist on black bike, with very tiny lamp twinkling on handlebars, almost collides with car (again, emergency stop). Even after I'd spotted the bike I still had difficulty seeing it!(I was walking a the time)

3) Me driving this time,  approaching traffic island near home - cyclist in bright clothing comes down road from my right - taking a "kerb-hugging" line around the island. Amazed I hadn't seem him, but my usual driving style meant I didn't hit the poor guy as he went past. It would have been my fault.

Hi viz LOL!
http://www.nottinghampost.com/news/nottingham-news/masked-man-hi-vis-clo...

Strange how they can still msnage to see "horrifically, terrifyingly" bright rear lights. That was the description one driver gave of my Exposure Tracer when she stopped to moan at me. Afraid I wasn't terribly sympathetic - something alomg the lines of "well at least you saw me" (some words omitted). I begin to fear this is the only solution - make sure every one of them feels the need to honk, then at least if they hit me it's because they are psychopaths, rather than just inattentive fuckwits.

A cunning trick used by some motorcyclists - yellow jacket, white lid, black trousers - it looks close enough to a police motorcyclist to make drivers notice them a quarter second earlier. Not sure it'd work for cyclists as well, as every rider and their dog seems to be wearing yellow hi-viz these days (including me), and there's not so many police cyclists to form that pattern-recognition.

I wonder if riding a bike with flashing blue lights while wearing a police uniform will help get drivers to notice you. It might also help reduce traffic offences ... bonus.

Sometime ago in the comments section of a Road.cc clothing review, someone suggested that a hi-viz jacket with a large speedcamera logo on the back would be effective.

I really think that this would get driver's attention.

Burtthebike - I'll give you a like for 'pour encourager les autres'  

I guess the corollary of the title is that if drivers did see cyclists then they subsequently decided to run them over on purpose.... in reality I think that there is plenty of evidence to suggest that most drivers are incapable of concentrating fully for some long or even short journeys: there are physical distractions and the mind wanders....as does mine when I'm on long bike rides.   Like many riders I've taken to wearing bright overshoes - as they rotate - and bright, flashing day lights in the hope of catching their attention.  This sometimes irritates some, but at least I know they have seen me.  And if they do cut me up then they've have done it on purpose.   

I guess the corolloy of the title is that if drivers did see cyclists then they subsequently decided to run them over on purpose.... in reality I think that there is plenty of evidence to suggest that most drivers are incapable of concentrating fully for some long or even short journeys: there are physical distractions and the mind wanders....as does mine when I'm on long bike rides.   Like many riders I've taken to wearing bright overshoes - as they rotate - and bright, flashing day lights in the hope of catching their attention.  This sometimes irritates some, but at least I know they have seen me.  And if they do cut me up then they've have done it on purpose.   

the gov/justice system is only interested in margins of errors if it favourts motorists, 'moments inattentuiion' etc. A couple of years ago a child fell off a shared use path, the motorist that hit her didn't ease off the gas pedal, nor did anyone else. Everyone said it was the mothers fault for not looking after the child properly or it was an 'accident' and that the driver couldn't do anything to avoid the child.

This is BS, they were a couple of feet away from a child on a bike who happened to be on a path and people still think doing 40/50/60mph is acceptable. The incident was totally avoidable IF drivers were bothered to assess the risk they were presenting to others if they make a small error which without them being there no harm would come about.

Too many people see driving as a background task to be done while checking their phone, chatting on hands-free or watching something on their iPad.

The gorilla video is only a fair comparison if you'd said, "count the passes while watching out for a gorilla." Drivers should be able to operate a car while watching out for hazards.

Unfortunately, too many drive their cars with no margin, either by paying too little attention in the first place or by driving so recklessly that they leave themselves no way out of a situation when it develops.

Judging from the near miss video series would the best idea be to have a large design of an outstretched middle finger on the back of any bike clothing as this seems to be instantly visible to any driver who hadn't previously displayed any recognition of a cyclist as they drove past.

lazy, distracted, going too fast, impatient and don't give a fuck about anyone else people, who on top of that know the liklihood of being caught and/or punished is remote, is what it boils down to.

Pretty much everything else is a feeble excuse. 

Every comment here, and the original research has missed the most important point: self preservation is the most powerful force on earth, and drivers conform to this and ignore things which are not a threat.  If all cyclists carried an AK-47, suddenly all drivers would see them.

I well remember the apocryphal story of the American motorcyclist who was regularly cut up on their 50m commute, so he painted the bike fluo pink, wore pink leathers and kept the lights on all the time: result?  No change in cutting up rate.  Then he painted the bike like a police bike, wore leathers that looked like police uniform and had a large ariel sticking out of the panniers; result?  Problem solved.

Drivers aren't scared enough.  Perhaps a few cyclists could drag  the odd driver out and beat them within an inch of their life "pour encourager les autres".  Accidentally of course, they were just dazzled by the sun.

Quote:

"When we are driving, there's 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."

Well now, isn't that why learning to drive is a massively rigorous training regime taking years and with regular updates and retesting, to make sure drivers are fully competent to operate heavy machinery in close proximity to pedestrians and vulnerable road users. Oh, wait...

This has been known about for a long time, since WWII in fact.

Development of tactics go fighter pilots in WWII identified that pilots would not see objects (targets) even when looking at them. The brain simply ignores some things depending on how it stitches images together.

It's not trying to create an excuse, it's simply part of human factors. Something which pilots are taught to understand and they are taught how to do effective visual clearing sweeps (and also told to move around inside the cockpit to see past airframe/canopy structures).

Drivers simply aren't taught these practises and become complacent. When checking the road, the brain is expecting to see a clear road or a car. If it doesn't see a car (or sees something that is conflicting with expectations) it will essentially ignore it.

The problem is, if a WWII pilot missed a target, he ended up dead. If a driver misses a potential traffic conflicting, often a more vulnerable user end up dead.

It seems, once again, better teaching of drivers would lead to fewer collisions.

Would be good if they did some follow up research to see if colours or lights etc had any effect.