Originally Posted by
kickstart
Another issue would be how to he validate the data. Other than the simple fact that there was or wasn't a actual collision, the who, what, and why would be influenced by the veracity of the parties involved and the cyclists personal convictions on the value of lights.
The integrity of the data would always be iffy. I doubt they can strictly verify a big chunk of a year-long study. As with the Danish experiment, I believe it would mostly be dependent on the word of the participants.