Abiding by the law when it does not exist: The case of the helmet bicycle law

Influence of familiarity with traffic regulations on delivery riders’ e-bike crashes and helmet use: Two mediator ordered logit models

“…Using ordered logistic analysis, Wang et al (2012) found that e-bike riders with weak law and safety awareness exhibited multiple dangerous riding behaviors. Valero-Mora et al (2020) conducted an online survey of 5,918 respondents in 18 countries on bicycle helmet law and found that although both Australia and Argentina have mandatory helmet laws, Australian respondents exhibited higher awareness of the helmet law (91%) than Argentinians (45%); the Australians' helmet wearing proportion was 75.6% in contrast to 37.5% of Argentinians.…”

Effectiveness of bicycle helmets and injury prevention: a systematic review of meta-analyses

“…The analyzed literature clearly states that helmets are the most effective in preventing severe head injuries, which are often a result of vehicle-bicyclist crash and while some governments have been promoting practices of safe cycling, the law compliance has historically varied. Valero-Mora et al 33 investigated this phenomenon and found that this variation did not seem clearly related to the prevailing bicycle helmet law. The authors found that while in the Netherlands, people knew that helmets were not mandatory and they often reported not wearing them regularly (only 2.4 percent reported always using them), in Norway, under similar conditions about 80 percent reported always wearing a helmet.…”

“…The authors found that while in the Netherlands, people knew that helmets were not mandatory and they often reported not wearing them regularly (only 2.4 percent reported always using them), in Norway, under similar conditions about 80 percent reported always wearing a helmet. Consequently Valero-Mora et al 33 concluded that though the laws by themselves may not yield a sufficient effect without proper publicity to make riders aware of such laws, awareness-raising campaigns are critical for convincing people to wear helmets. Same authors used their modelling estimation results to indicate that the belief that helmets are mandatory together with the age and gender of the respondent were significant predictors of helmet use, but the helmet law itself did not predict the reported use of bicycle helmets.…”

“…Nevertheless, as urban planning moves from using oversimplified analogies derived from physics to becoming increasingly interdisciplinary and incorporating more insights from, for example, psychology, law, emergency medicine, the transportation field and its priorities may also continue to shift over time 33 , 40 , 41 . With respect to the societal costs, Gössling et al 42 extrapolated that in the European Union, the external costs of automobiles are about 500 billion Euros per year, while cycling and walking make up benefits of 24 billion Euros and 66 billion Euros per year, therefore from a cost perspective, amplifying active travel and increasing the safety of cycling are worth investing in, particularly in the context of climate goals 43 , 44 .…”

Unhelmeted Injured Cyclists in a Canadian Emergency Department: Cycling Behavior and Attitudes Towards Helmet Use

“…7,[9][10][11][12][13][14] Recent research suggests the belief in a helmet law (even if mistaken) is an important factor for adopting helmet use. 15 Opponents of mandatory helmet use have argued that ridership will be deterred, that helmet legislation selectively deters cycling among those with low injury risk, and that wearing a helmet may lead to behavioral adaptation and more high-risk behavior. 7 A systematic review of bicycle helmet use and risk compensation found that most studies did not support risk compensation.…”