Saw a classic left hook...

[Origamist]

[quote name='swee'pea99']It is weird, isn't it? It's not malice, or - I suspect - stupidity. They simply Don't See You. Like they've become programmed to notice only things the size of cars+. Same thing happens to motorcyclists all the time. [/quote]

A case can be made for this thesis, as I alluded to in post three. The phenomenon of "Looked but Failed to See" is a significant and complex factor in accident causation. Taking a prominent road position or wearing Hi Viz etc may help, but cyclists are at a disadvantage because at a cognitive level humans will naturally focus on larger motorised vehicles as they present a greater threat. I suspect Arch scanned ahead and rightly targeted the car as a hazard (she wrote "I better not move too far to the right for my turn, that car needs some space") but at the expense of the cyclist.

 

[LOGAN 5]

Agree they do overtake first by swinging out and then turning left so proving that they've seen the cyclist first. Got knocked off this way years back by a car which had been driving slowly behind me for a hundred yards or so down a residential street then decided to overtake and turn left - into my front wheel. He then claimed his car hadn't touched my bike and I fell off unaided! Very strange.

 

[Origamist]

Agree they do overtake first by swinging out and then turning left so proving that they've seen the cyclist first. Got knocked off this way years back by a car which had been driving slowly behind me for a hundred yards or so down a residential street then decided to overtake and turn left - into my front wheel. He then claimed his car hadn't touched my bike and I fell off unaided! Very strange.

Left hooks often happen in the way you describe above - where drivers exercise poor judgement and/or lack spatial awareness in relation to the speed of the cyclist they have just overtaken and are about to hook.

What I find more interesting is the perceptual/cognitive lapse (or what one cycling author called: a "brain fart") that Arch mentioned when she did not initially detect the cyclist - even though the rider must have been in her field of view as he was about to be hooked by the red car.

I have experienced something similar on a RaB when I failed to respond/identify a slow moving cyclist coming from the right as I was focussed on a fast moving car and large bus also approaching from the right. I had to brake to avoid the cyclist when I became aware of his presence. This attentional selectiveness unsettled me.

 

[Arch]

Left hooks often happen in the way you describe above - where drivers exercise poor judgement and/or lack spatial awareness in relation to the speed of the cyclist they have just overtaken and are about to hook.

What I find more interesting is the perceptual/cognitive lapse (or what one cycling author called: a "brain fart") that Arch mentioned when she did not initially detect the cyclist - even though the rider must have been in her field of view as he was about to be hooked by the red car.

I have experienced something similar on a RaB when I failed to respond/identify a slow moving cyclist coming from the right as I was focussed on a fast moving car and large bus also approaching me from the right. I had to brake to avoid the cyclist when I became aware of his presence. This attentional selectiveness unsettled me.

Yes, it was mostly this that interested me - I like to think I'm generally on the good end of the scale of being observant - mostly out of self defence of course. So did the car simply overwhelm my observation, because it was a potential threat (we were about to share the same small bit of road)? In which case colour and size may have had nothing to do with it, I simply 'saw' the thing my brain felt I most needed to...

Just like those experiments with the basketball team and the gorilla I guess.. And it begs the question, how much else does even the most observant of us miss? Scary when you start to think about it - not for our own safety, because it seems we see the things we need to, but in terms of being witnesses etc...

 

[Origamist]

Yes, it was mostly this that interested me - I like to think I'm generally on the good end of the scale of being observant - mostly out of self defence of course. So did the car simply overwhelm my observation, because it was a potential threat (we were about to share the same small bit of road)? In which case colour and size may have had nothing to do with it, I simply 'saw' the thing my brain felt I most needed to...

Just like those experiments with the basketball team and the gorilla I guess.. And it begs the question, how much else does even the most observant of us miss? Scary when you start to think about it - not for our own safety, because it seems we see the things we need to, but in terms of being witnesses etc...

With competing visual stimuli things get overlooked, or selectivity kicks-in, or false conjunctions are formed etc. This is a particular problem for the vulnerable on our roads.

I used to very dubious about most SMIDSYs, but now I give them a little more credence.

 

[Arch]

With competing visual stimuli things get overlooked, or selectivity kicks-in, or false conjunctions are formed etc. This is a particular problem for the vulnerable on our roads.

I used to very dubious about most SMIDSYs, but now I give them a little more credence.

I dunno about the SMIDSY's - I'd say if it comes to conflict then someone was clearly not looking well enough when they should have been. If they didn't see you, then either their eyesight is defective, or they weren't paying attention. But I can see that it's easy to overlook something that you are not likely to come into close contact with...

What's the solution to competeing visual stimuli then? Taking away unnecessary stimuli would seem to be a good idea, but you can't very well insist all shops have blank grey shopfronts etc... Once again, I suspect it comes down to a) better training and inducing a more responsible attitude to driving - "when you're driving, that's the most important thing, so bloody well concentrate". Sadly, of course, the hardest thing to change is an attitude.

 

[Origamist]

I dunno about the SMIDSY's - I'd say if it comes to conflict then someone was clearly not looking well enough when they should have been. If they didn't see you, then either their eyesight is defective, or they weren't paying attention. But I can see that it's easy to overlook something that you are not likely to come into close contact with...

What's the solution to competeing visual stimuli then? Taking away unnecessary stimuli would seem to be a good idea, but you can't very well insist all shops have blank grey shopfronts etc... Once again, I suspect it comes down to a) better training and inducing a more responsible attitude to driving - "when you're driving, that's the most important thing, so bloody well concentrate". Sadly, of course, the hardest thing to change is an attitude.

If you accept the "looked but didn't see" phenomenon, you have to concede that it might be a contributory factor in some RTAs. That's not to say that most SMIDSYs are the result of cognitive failure - in most cases it's little more than an excuse for poor observation and inconsiderate driving.

I wish I could provide a solution, but I don't know enough about the subject and I very much doubt a silver bullet exists that will solve the problem. FWIW, I think some of the following might help: shared space ideas, more cyclists on the roads, conspicuity (assertive road position, Hi Viz and increasing your frontal profile), driver training, less motorised vehicles etc. Fanciful I know!

 

[swee'pea99]

I believe this kind of 'selective seeing' is a significant consideration in those experiments you hear about in - Holland is it? - where they've removed all road signs, traffic lights, pedestrian crossings, the whole shebang. The idea being that by making everything clearly random, all the time, it makes it impossible for drivers, or anyone else for that matter, to do anything *but* keep their eyes open and concentrate all the time. Not sure it would work where I work - in London's West End - but it's certainly a thought.

 

[Origamist]

Not sure it would work where I work - in London's West End - but it's certainly a thought[/B].

Yes, that's the shared space concept that I touched upon in my post above.

Oh, it does work in the West End:

http://www.howwedrive.com/2008/09/04/never-mind-the-bollards-heres-shared-space/

 

[Arch]

Interesting this should come up - on the local BBC news this morning they had a report about blind people not liking the shared space idea, because the lack of kerbs and so on means they have less idea where they are. I guess done properly it needs to have textured strips or something. And of course if the blind people could be confident that other people were paying proper attention, they might be less intimidated about the prospect of walking in front of a car...

 

[Origamist]

Interesting this should come up - on the local BBC news this morning they had a report about blind people not liking the shared space idea, because the lack of kerbs and so on means they have less idea where they are. I guess done properly it needs to have textured strips or something. And of course if the blind people could be confident that other people were paying proper attention, they might be less intimidated about the prospect of walking in front of a car...

Tactile paving is used. It does have associated problems though...

 

[Arch]

Tactile paving is used. It does have associated problems though...

The area they showed (admittedly in a fleeting camera pan with not much detail) didn't seem to have anything like that, so I could quite understand the point of view. As ever, nothing is simple...

 

[hackbike 6]

My SMIDSY's are often peds who don't see me which is a big problem for me.Fitting the dual horns is a big help though.

 

[LOGAN 5]

Yes, that's the shared space concept that I touched upon in my post above.

Oh, it does work in the West End:

http://www.howwedrive.com/2008/09/04/never-mind-the-bollards-heres-shared-space/

I cycle round the Seven Diales every day and it's a nightmare. People really do think it's pedestrianised even though traffic flows round it. Peds are at their most unpredictable and walk out in the road with no idea that they are in a shared space. It's a dodgy place to cycle round (a few large holes in the road too to negotiate as well). The pretty block paved road (now being dug up again) also leads peds to think it's not a road so I have to be careful to avoid them just walking out without looking. The paving hasn't been laid very well as there are serious dips in it particularly near the road humps.

If peds know it's a shared space and are responsive to the environment they're in that's fair enough but the onus is on motorists/cyclists to avoid peds who are simply not looking AT ALL. All shared space users need to respect the fact that they are in a shared space, you can't have one group totally divorce themselves from a resposibility to exhibit some safety awareness to the detriment of the other users.

There's a similar shared road in Brighton with all the street furniture removed. This does work quite well and as far as I can tell not very many cars use it anyhow. Those that do drive slowly but I wonder how long it will be before somebody gets hurt there. Lots of meandering day trippers, foreign students (looking the wrong way if they look at all) and tourists all gazing at the Royal Pavilion skyline.

 

[Origamist]

I cycle round the Seven Diales every day and it's a nightmare. People really do think it's pedestrianised even though traffic flows round it. Peds are at their most unpredictable and walk out in the road with no idea that they are in a shared space. It's a dodgy place to cycle round (a few large holes in the road too to negotiate as well). The pretty block paved road (now being dug up again) also leads peds to think it's not a road so I have to be careful to avoid them just walking out without looking. The paving hasn't been laid very well as there are serious dips in it particularly near the road humps.

If peds know it's a shared space and are responsive to the environment they're in that's fair enough but the onus is on motorists/cyclists to avoid peds who are simply not looking AT ALL. All shared space users need to respect the fact that they are in a shared space, you can't have one group totally divorce themselves from a resposibility to exhibit some safety awareness to the detriment of the other users.

Funny thing is Logan 5, there have been no serious injuries recorded in the 16 years since the shared space concept came into operation at Seven Dials.

I for one am extremely glad that cyclists and motorised traffic are forced to defer to pedestrians at this 7 lane junction!