Cyclist' safety perceptions of cycling infrastructure at un-signalised intersections: Cross-sectional survey of Queensland cyclists

, , & (2017) Cyclist' safety perceptions of cycling infrastructure at un-signalised intersections: Cross-sectional survey of Queensland cyclists. Journal of Transport and Health, 6, pp. 13-22.

View at publisher

Description

Previous research suggests that cyclists’ perceptions of the safety of cycling infrastructure influences their desire to ride on that infrastructure. Cycling infrastructure includes both cycling facilities and cycling-supportive road treatments. While researchers have previously examined the safety perceptions of cycling infrastructure on midblock road sections, little is known about the safety perceptions of cycling infrastructure at intersections. The aim of this study was to investigate which types of cycling infrastructure do cyclists perceive to be the safest at un-signalised intersections. This study was conducted in Queensland, Australia. Adult members of bicycle organisations (N=214) completed an online survey about their demographic characteristics, cycling habits, previous near-miss or collision experiences while cycling, and safety perceptions of cycling infrastructure at intersections. General linear mixed-modelling was used to examine associations between both safety perceptions and gender and 12 types of cycling infrastructure at three different motorist-cyclist interaction scenarios. Off-road bicycle paths and footpaths were perceived to be the safest cycling infrastructure at un-signalised intersections (p<0.05). While cycling through an intersection, participants were more concerned about being sideswiped than being struck directly at the side by a motorist (p<0.05). The findings suggest that cyclists’ safety perceptions of cycling infrastructure at un-signalised intersections are associated with motorists’ yielding behaviour towards cyclists. Cyclists felt safer using cycling infrastructure where they had to give way to turning motorists at the intersection than using cycling infrastructure where they had the right of way. By doing so, cyclists can decide whether or not it is safe to cross the intersection rather than worry about turning motorists who could be attempting to outrace them. In practice, assessing motorists’ behaviours and attitudes towards cyclists should be considered before designing and implementing cycling infrastructure at intersections.

Impact and interest:

20 citations in Scopus
16 citations in Web of Science®
Search Google Scholar™

Citation counts are sourced monthly from Scopus and Web of Science® citation databases.

These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.

Citations counts from the Google Scholar™ indexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.

Full-text downloads:

185 since deposited on 07 Mar 2017
41 in the past twelve months

Full-text downloads displays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.

ID Code: 104119
Item Type: Contribution to Journal (Journal Article)
Refereed: Yes
ORCID iD:
Heesch, Kristiannorcid.org/0000-0003-1931-3683
Measurements or Duration: 10 pages
Keywords: bicycle, built environment, cycling, infrastructure, intersection, road safety, safety perception, transport
DOI: 10.1016/j.jth.2017.03.001
ISSN: 2214-1405
Pure ID: 33206082
Divisions: Past > QUT Faculties & Divisions > Faculty of Health
Past > Institutes > Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation
Current > Research Centres > CARRS-Q Centre for Future Mobility
Copyright Owner: Consult author(s) regarding copyright matters
Copyright Statement: This work is covered by copyright. Unless the document is being made available under a Creative Commons Licence, you must assume that re-use is limited to personal use and that permission from the copyright owner must be obtained for all other uses. If the document is available under a Creative Commons License (or other specified license) then refer to the Licence for details of permitted re-use. It is a condition of access that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. If you believe that this work infringes copyright please provide details by email to qut.copyright@qut.edu.au
Deposited On: 07 Mar 2017 01:37
Last Modified: 18 May 2024 21:30