Help needed: Why a high-viz vest might not work

[Oblivion]

Maybe ( Just thinking from a weird perspective here) but, Hi viz could sometimes make a cage driver more aware of you ,trying to keep himself out of the way as much as possible. Because he is concentrating on you, he loses his ability to make sense of the things around him, making said person make rash decisions/ lose all concentration of things in front of him.

I think this post is complete bullshit, But hey, you never know what these turkeys are gonna do sometimes.

[steve_t]

The three you have listed all relate to the other road user. What about the rider? Does their behaviour/attitude change when they are wearing hi-viz because they unconsciously believe that they are highly visible? Are they likely to be involved in more car vs bike crashes?

I think any statistics collected would favour hi vis but this would probably be due to the fact that a rider who chooses to wear hi vis is already a very careful/wary rider. Corrected for this, I'd imagine hi vis has no statistically significant effect at all.

I wonder if anyone in hi vis has been hit due to driver 'target fixation'

[Usarka]

Way ahead of you. As I said, I only need help with this one little bit.

Fair enough, but my point is that your examples are not valid or logical.

Only two reasons then.

1. Using your threat analogy, car drivers may see high vis as low threat (as opposed to a gang member in black on a harley with a german helmet). I don't think the govt will want us patching up so this is a red herring.

2. Hi Vis may have a negative effect where there is little background contrast, ie glare around dawn/dusk.

[Bounce001]

What about the basic fact that when you are wearing hi-viz you just 'blend' in to all the other colours around you and are less likely to be seen. Whereas a rider wearing black is seen as a threat and more likely to be noticed because of this.

[Pascal]

Below is what I have so far. Anyone have any other ideas that I should consider?

What about familiarity? This may be a long shot; but people may be used to seeing hi-viz vests on roadworkers, etc. Combine that with motion camouflage and it can very well become easy to ignore the motorcyclist as just another roadworker.

[rickstv]

I don't know about you guys, but when I'm in my car and see a hi vis jacket, I'm expecting it to be on the side of the road leaning on a shovel not hurtling towards me at the speed limit. This may change in the future though. Just a thought.
Rick

[george formby]

I was quite suprised at the number of riders on the Southern Cross who were wearing Hi Vis. The interesting thing was that when following behind them the Hi vis really stood out, but when in front of them, it was the headlight that was noticeable, and the Hi Vis couldn't really be seen.

Remember also that as motorcyclists we were all looking for other motorcyclists. What this showed was that Hi Vis stands out when you are expecting to see something, but dosen't stand out if you aren't expecting to see it.

I don't think anyone can claim that Hi Vis reduces safety, but also I don't believe that it increases safety for motorcyclists either.

I had the exact same experience recently. No indication of hi viz until long after I had seen the headlight.

From another motorists perspective, the only other Hi Viz they are accustomed too belong to road workers, surveyors etc. I believe some drivers will assume stationary person before they think bike, particularly in urban traffic where a headlight may be obscured.

[MSTRS:Me]

The hi-viz question amounts to nothing more than theory.

There is only one way to be sure of anything...real world case studies.
And there is only one way for one of those to be carried out...
A random selection of bikers (say 1000 minimum) who are given hi-viz to wear, and are instructed to ride however they normally do.
A second (control) group chosen and instructed exactly the same, but without hi-viz.
After a year (more?) compare the accident stats of each group to current stats.

One thing I will guarantee - there will be no discernable difference, so the argument that hi-viz doesn't work will be proved. The theories as to why will remain unanswered.

[steve_t]

The hi-viz question amounts to nothing more than theory.

There is only one way to be sure of anything...real world case studies.
And there is only one way for one of those to be carried out...
A random selection of bikers (say 1000 minimum) who are given hi-viz to wear, and are instructed to ride however they normally do.
A second (control) group chosen and instructed exactly the same, but without hi-viz.
After a year (more?) compare the accident stats of each group to current stats.

One thing I will guarantee - there will be no discernable difference, so the argument that hi-viz doesn't work will be proved. The theories as to why will remain unanswered.

How can you guarantee the result of an experiment that tests 'nothing more than a theory'?

I reckon if we look at the statistics that show the number of accidents per 1000 people who currently wear hi vis vs the number of accidents per 1000 bikers who don't wear hi vis, we could find that wearing hi vis is statistically more dangerous

[wysper]

What about familiarity? This may be a long shot; but people may be used to seeing hi-viz vests on roadworkers, etc. Combine that with motion camouflage and it can very well become easy to ignore the motorcyclist as just another roadworker.

+1 on this one.

Hi vis is associated with road workers and people on the SIDE OF THE ROAD.
So seeing a hi vis in the distance the car driver might automatically assume said hi vis wearer is on the side of the road and not moving. Now not a threat.

[bogan]

I reckon if we look at the statistics that show the number of accidents per 1000 people who currently wear hi vis vs the number of accidents per 1000 bikers who don't wear hi vis, we could find that wearing hi vis is statistically more dangerous

No it is the opposite, about 30% less risk I think they found. Gotta ask why though. why do bikers wear high vis? because the are concerned for their safety. Why do bikers not wear high vis? two reasons which are lumped into the same group; because they are not as concerned for their safety, and/or because they believe it is ineffective.

So what can we learn? Bikers who are more concerned for their safety, crash less.

Not exactly rocket surgery is it?

[Ocean1]

What about familiarity? This may be a long shot; but people may be used to seeing hi-viz vests on roadworkers, etc. Combine that with motion camouflage and it can very well become easy to ignore the motorcyclist as just another roadworker.

Good point, road workers aren't generally expected to be traveling at speed.



At least that's what I've been told.

[oneofsix]

No it is the opposite, about 30% less risk I think they found. Gotta ask why though. why do bikers wear high vis? because the are concerned for their safety. Why do bikers not wear high vis? two reasons which are lumped into the same group; because they are not as concerned for their safety, and/or because they believe it is ineffective.

So what can we learn? Bikers who are more concerned for their safety, crash less.

Not exactly rocket surgery is it?

you would dare to suggest the quoted stats were more down to rider attitude than whether or not they wore hi-vis? But that would mean the stats were irrelevant to the affect of the hi-vis on the other vehicle.

My daughter asked why those biker were wearing construction vests, what does that suggest? I asked if the vests were the first thing she noticed, they weren't, she saw the bikes first and only noticed the vests whilst trying to figure out if the lead bike was a Goldwing, but it was a BMW.

Why hi-vis vest may not work - confusion and or distraction.

[steve_t]

No it is the opposite, about 30% less risk I think they found. Gotta ask why though. why do bikers wear high vis? because the are concerned for their safety. Why do bikers not wear high vis? two reasons which are lumped into the same group; because they are not as concerned for their safety, and/or because they believe it is ineffective.

So what can we learn? Bikers who are more concerned for their safety, crash less.

Not exactly rocket surgery is it?

Really?! I thought the sheer numbers of non hi vis would bring the crash % down. Damn it.

Not rocket surgery but it may be brain science that goes over the heads of ACC

[MSTRS:Me]

How can you guarantee the result of an experiment that tests 'nothing more than a theory'?

Touche.

My point is that theories abound as to whether hi-viz works, or not, and why.
In the case of hi-viz, I don't believe proving any of the theories is possible.

But I also believe we know enough about the subject to state with conviction that WEARING HI-VIZ WILL NOT MAKE US SAFER.