Why Do Some Cyclists Run Red Lights?

almillar

Not a serious question but...Why should a cyclist know what a red light even means if there is no requirement for any kind of learning qualification?

Relies on personal responsibility, fear of death/injury.

I must admit to doing this. I'll join in with pedestrians using the pedestrian crossing to get across, for example. Certainly have to take care and not inconvenience anyone though, and be aware of the sequencing of the lights.

[Deleted User]

JP08 wrote: »

I think it is safe to assume that the survey methodology was to only count on red lights otherwise (as you say) the whole exercise would be pointless.

Of course it would be pointless. There's a very old and well-established principle in science:

If there's a sensible interpretation of a text and a stupid interpretation, then you presume the sensible meaning unless there's good reason to do otherwise.

There's nothing to beat prejudice for motivating stupid arguments.

Norman_Castle

Johno100 wrote: »

Anyway, as I was saying all they have done is taken the number of cyclists 'violating' red lights at each of the junctions during the monitoring period and divided that by the total number of cyclists using the junction in the same period to determine a percentage of violators. So taking no account of those cyclists who passed through the junction when they had a green light and so couldn't have jumped a red light if they'd have wanted to.

Where do they say they've done the above?

Credit tfl with some sense. A survey of red light offenders would ignore the green light phase.

Car_54

The conclusion that 84% of cyclists obeyed the lights is deeply flawed, since the report has not consided the number ignoring amber lights.

Amber has the same meaning as red, unless stopping would be unsafe. Given the relative ease of stopping a bike, there are probably few situations where stopping would be unsafe.

From my own observations, I seldom see a cyclist stop on amber. I would suggest that if amber violations were taken into account, the 16% might double or more, and the proportion of "law abiding" cyclists is MUCH lower than suggested.

Johno100

JP08 wrote: »

Johnno100. I've had a look at the wording in the survey, and I have to say I think your interpretation of the data is incorrect, though in some cases I will agree it is not clear.

eg "Table 1 shows that the majority of cyclists obeyed the red lights at site 1. Of the 3512 cyclists that used the junction during the surveyed hours an average of 87% of cyclists did not violate red lights. As such, the anecdotal evidence that most cyclists ride through red lights cannot be attributed to this site."

isn't particularly clear whereas

"Table 3 shows the total number of cyclists who either violated or respected red lights during both the AM and PM peaks. Whilst the majority of cyclists did obey the traffic signals at each arm, there are differences in the numbers of male and female cyclists that did so. However, as there were also differences in the numbers of male and female cyclists using the junction, the proportion of men and women violating red lights is similar."

is clearly talking about the number who violated or respected the red signal only.

I think it is safe to assume that the survey methodology was to only count on red lights otherwise (as you say) the whole exercise would be pointless.

I wish I was as confident as you. BIB says 3512 used the junction, not that of the 3512 faced with a red light 86% didn 't violate it. If your interpretation is correct then why is there no figure quoted for the total users of the junction?

Johno100

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Credit tfl with some sense. A survey of red light offenders would ignore the green light phase.

Would it? We are talking about research conducted by an organisation that has subsquently spent close to a £1bn of public money on cycling infrastructure, of course they are going to go out of their way to paint cyclists in a good light.

Anyway this survey was conducted nearly 10 years ago, I wonder what the figures would be like today? A smaller survey with static cameras conducted 3 years ago by the Licenced Taxi Drivers Association showed that at the sites surveyed in rush hour more than 50% of cyclists jumped red lighs.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/cyclists-filmed-jumping-red-lights-in-london-taxi-drivers-hidden-camera-footage-8969043.html

andrewf75

Norman_Castle wrote: »

Why ask on a motoring board? Only cyclists can tell you why they do what they do. You'll find them on the cycling board.

do you really think they are different people?

Do you use the same mode of transport wherever you go?

JP08

Johno100 wrote: »

I wish I was as confident as you. BIB says 3512 used the junction, not that of the 3512 faced with a red light 86% didn 't violate it. If your interpretation is correct then why is there no figure quoted for the total users of the junction?

Well, as the total of the second table (which was very clear about being red only) adds up to 3510 (no I don't know where the other two went) I think I'm pretty confident in my interpretation.

Anyhow - if they were measuring red light violation, why would they care about the passing on green count ? It's not relevant data.

Johno100

JP08 wrote: »

Anyhow - if they were measuring red light violation, why would they care about the passing on green count ? It's not relevant data.

Because by including them it reduces the headline figure percentage of red light jumping cyclists.

JP08

Johno100 wrote: »

Would it? We are talking about research conducted by an organisation that has subsquently spent close to a £1bn of public money on cycling infrastructure, of course they are going to go out of their way to paint cyclists in a good light.

Anyway this survey was conducted nearly 10 years ago, I wonder what the figures would be like today? A smaller survey with static cameras conducted 3 years ago by the Licenced Taxi Drivers Association showed that at the sites surveyed in rush hour more than 50% of cyclists jumped red lighs.

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/cyclists-filmed-jumping-red-lights-in-london-taxi-drivers-hidden-camera-footage-8969043.html

Eh ? The first paragraph doesn't make sense - cause and effect are back to front. The survey was before the expenditure ...

And comparing a survey from an organisation that you assert may be biased with a survey from an organisation that is definitely biased is a novel debating tactic ...

And based on my personal very limited anecdotal survey of the junction I mentioned earlier, I'd say the percentages are pretty close to the 10 year old report. But that is very, very,very anecdotal.