Advocacy & Safety - Bike Safety Awareness Survey

I am a student from the University of Houston as well as an avid cyclist. I am conducting a survey to study the connection between a cyclist's experience, background, and current life stage with their bike safety awareness and practices. I would greatly appreciate the participation of any and every individual willing. The survey will be available until December 5th. Thank you for your time and possible contribution to my studies.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?hl=en&authkey=CKm-v40F&formkey=dG95UkhrQWlRWmMtVVJKODBabjFCbmc6MQ#gid=0

Not bad questions, but I'm sure the nit-pick patrol in A&S would dissect it just the same.

I feel like a lame goody two shoes now.

On a couple of questions it would have been nice to have more than one options (bike and where you ride) since I have a fairly even split.

Why did you restrict the question about bicycle accident to only include injuries versus the automobile question that was more general?

Yea, I would probably say my riding between solo and big groups is almost evenly split.

Why did you restrict the question about bicycle accident to only include injuries versus the automobile question that was more general?

Because he didn't want to know when you fell over cause you couldn't get your foot out of the pedal?

Because he didn't want to know when you fell over cause you couldn't get your foot out of the pedal?

Okay, but the way the question is phrased it would eliminate accidents that would be covered by the automobile question. Skewing his results.

For instance, as a teenager I was struck by a car while riding my bike near my house. Neither I nor the driver were injured. That would count as an accident under the automobile question but not under the bicycle question. If the OP is in fact conducting research, his/her question has introduced a distortion into the answers, thereby calling the survey's validity into question.

What is you name and under whose supervision are you conducting this research?

Okay, but the way the question is phrased it would eliminate accidents that would be covered by the automobile question. Skewing his results.

For instance, as a teenager I was struck by a car while riding my bike near my house. Neither I nor the driver were injured. That would count as an accident under the automobile question but not under the bicycle question. If the OP is in fact conducting research, his/her question has introduced a distortion into the answers, thereby calling the survey's validity into question.

I see your point, but that's not all his question misses. There are a number of things that you can't make equal on both sides. Some things that will throw it off:

* Bike slides out, no injury no damage. It's a crash, but it's not big deal.
* Car slides into a snow bank at low speed, no damage, no big deal.
* Bicyclist suffers overuse injury, hardly comparable to a injury car crash.
* Bicyclist crashes with other vehicle and isn't injured.
* Varying definitions of injury.


It's not as simple as comparing crashes to crashes. And if you only compare multi-vehicle crashes it's still not gonna work out. The odds of a minor fender bender sort of thing on a bike seem to be pretty low. Partially because there's no parking lot. Partially because bicyclists so often go in areas with low traffic, where motorists tend to do the opposite (probably not cause they like it).


Changing it to your question would be equally useless. However, at least with his question on it's own you get a number for how long you go between injuries. Unfortunately we're still stuck on the "varying definitions of injury" issue.

I just want to know the results of the research when you are done. I find it rather annoying that so many students come here, ask for our help and then don't bother informing us of their intentions or results.

Sure it is a school project... but just let us read the paper or see the results or post a picture of your submission, or whatever.

Don't just use us and leave us.

I see your point, but that's not all his question misses. There are a number of things that you can't make equal on both sides. Some things that will throw it off:

* Bike slides out, no injury no damage. It's a crash, but it's not big deal.
* Car slides into a snow bank at low speed, no damage, no big deal.
* Bicyclist suffers overuse injury, hardly comparable to a injury car crash.
* Bicyclist crashes with other vehicle and isn't injured.
* Varying definitions of injury.


It's not as simple as comparing crashes to crashes. And if you only compare multi-vehicle crashes it's still not gonna work out. The odds of a minor fender bender sort of thing on a bike seem to be pretty low. Partially because there's no parking lot. Partially because bicyclists so often go in areas with low traffic, where motorists tend to do the opposite (probably not cause they like it).


Changing it to your question would be equally useless. However, at least with his question on it's own you get a number for how long you go between injuries. Unfortunately we're still stuck on the "varying definitions of injury" issue.

Yes, but if the question concerned injuries, filtering out accidents without injuries (and providing some guidelines or means of estimating the severity of the injury) would need to occur. It is very unclear just what the OP is trying to determine.

The bottom line is that given the context of the OP's post, the inclusion of any information on the automobile seems irrelevant. ie, "...connection between a cyclist's experience, background, and current life stage with their bike safety awareness and practices..."

I just want to know the results of the research when you are done. I find it rather annoying that so many students come here, ask for our help and then don't bother informing us of their intentions or results.

Sure it is a school project... but just let us read the paper or see the results or post a picture of your submission, or whatever.

Don't just use us and leave us.
I'm currently writing a cycling paper for my class. I'll post it when I'm done.

current life stage Interesting new PC term.

As a former academic myself, I AM surprised that, even though already asked, the request for surveyor's identity and affiliation has not been provided already/upfront here in the thread. I'd like to know what class & department, and professor this is being conducted for - not "supervisor" though the prof theoretically is "supervising".

Then again, I never failed to provide this information - so my expectations might be "skewed" by my own experience. Has the Human Subjects office at your university cleared the survey? The purpose statement on the survey is terribly simplistic - "educational purposes"? That covers a wide range of sins.

Not bad questions, but I'm sure the nit-pick patrol in A&S would dissect it just the same.

ummm, yeah