Motorcycles- a danger to other drivers?

http://www.medicaldaily.com/element...zard-cars-low-prevalence-effect-action-268007


That's how this article presents this study in the first paragraph. Because motorcycles are not prevalent other drivers are not used to us being present, so accidents occur.

There is an easy solution..........we just need more motorcycles on the road so that car drivers are used to seeing us!

So because they don't pay attention it's my fault?

Yes. Get a car like a normal person.

just another "study" sponsored by a group with anti motorcycle leanings tailored to conclude the pre-desired result


I summarize that we all have to die from something, increasing the risk motorcycle fatality only decreases the risk of dying from heart disease of cancer or otherwise boring life

I always enjoy riding in Mediterranean countries because about 90% of drivers there grew up on mopeds and have an awareness of and a respect for bikers.

Here in the UK I reckon less than 10% of drivers have ridden a bike.

I've lived in a Mediterranean country (Spain) for some 19 years now, and every day I am still dumbfounded by the scant disregard that I get from a great number of the local cagers. Their view is that they're driving a car, you're on a bike - so you're the smaller vehicle and they have precedence on you. Quite frankly I feel safer in France, where lots of drivers have an eye out for motorcyclists and do such things as move to one side to make passing them easier for you, etc.

+1

Good one, FrogandTrumpet. Maybe I should have just said France, the Italians are pretty crazy too!

I visited Seoul, South Korea several times and people there NEED to have a healthy respect for the motorcycle riders because they are the dominant group of vehicles in that city. In fact, if you exit a building near an intersection, as a pedestrian, you have to look both ways before walking onto the sidewalk or you might get broadsided by a delivery scooter. The cops there allow the scooter delivery men to ride, at speeds around 20 mph, on the sidewalks! :huh

Isn't it really "driver ignorance" creates danger? A good driver will seldom be surprised by any of their environment, moving or stationary.

Well there is plenty of "driver/rider ignorance" on the part of large groups of motorcyclists that bunch together, ride way under the speed limit ,then don't expect cagers to pass them also. So one could see their point in this regard. We have all been in our cars and had this happen.It forces car drivers to take big chances and also any overtaking motorcyclists. I have seen 50 bikes in a group like this going 45 in a 55 zone! Stretched out for a mile. This is dumb riding........ NO THEY WERE NOT HARLEYS.... Japanese Barco loungers and Spyders mostly. I chose another route around them, but should I have to?

Here in Japan it is similar. There are enough two-wheelers on the road that you just have to expect them. Also, the way the laws are written, the bigger vehicle assumes a bigger share of the fault in an accident.

I don't see the text of this article as biased. It seems exactly factual and telling us something we all know. We are in fact in a greater danger of getting into an accident exactly because driver's "don't see us", exactly because they are not used to looking for, or judging the speed of, motorcycles. I thought it was interesting that, in the experiment, it worked similarly for buses.

And I think the solution hinted at in the last paragraph of the article is exactly right: driver's need to be taught to understand that their vision is not objective and can deceive them. It annoys me when I see people pull up to an intersection on a rolling stop, with maybe a half second look, and then pull out. It's in those situations they don't give themselves enough time to see the unexpected. I always look twice in every direction, and move my head to change my position. It was hammered into me at a young age and has stuck.

Marrk53 asks whether it is driver ignorance that causes the problem. I think that is what the article says. Driver's are ignorant of how their eyes work. It is a good thing that there are articles like this to explain it to those interested in reading them.

OK, on re-read, I'll grant you, the heading's reference to "traffic hazard" seems biased. It could have said that the "element of surprise" puts motorcycle at a greater risk of being in an accident. And it could have strengthened its last paragraph's hint that car drivers ought to learn how to scan properly.

The problem really is with the headline, not with the study or even necessarily the rest of the article. The prevalence effect that the article mentioned did appear to manifest during the study. The thing is, this was true of both motorcycles and buses. Just as recognition of motorcycles became better when the motorcycles were more frequent, the recognition of buses became better when buses were more frequent. It would have be just as (in)appropriate to title the article "'Element Of Surprise' Makes Buses Greater Traffic Hazard Than Cars: The Low-Prevalence Effect In Action". It's just poor journalism.

The better headline would have been ""Element of Surprise' Makes Drivers a Greater Hazard to Motorcyclists" since they're the ones not seeing us.

I had understood in Japan the comment "I didn't see them!" is essentially a confession of guilt. They have this "odd" concept that a driver is supposed to be paying attention to what they are doing, seeing all vehicles regardless of size and probably even pedestrians too... what a concept!

Actually it is very good journalism. That Hyper-overreactive title got us all to read it. I think large vehicles are often under-rated as to speed. Ever watch a 60mph freight train approach? You would swear it was going a lot slower.I think that you should always do a double look at large vehicles.
As for bikes, their small profile causes the problem there. You see them if you look twice also. When bikes ride in large groups with no spacing they do become just like 1 large vehicle and are very hard to judge. There is not one of us on here that has not judged passing distance incorrectly a time or two, and have been saved by the overtaken vehicle(s) slowing to let us in:eek1.