Abstract

This dissertation examines whether cyclists have a realistic appreciation of the effectiveness of cycle helmets, and whether they have a realistic appreciation of the risks of cycling, and whether the two are related.  Because cycle helmets and fear of cycling are deter cycling, and it is government policy to increase cycling for health and other reasons, exaggerated views may prevent policy being carried into practice.

A survey of over 300 cyclists was undertaken to discover the views of cyclists in those two areas.  Interviews were also conducted with ten cyclists to explore the subject in more depth.

An extensive literature search was also done, including publicity and research about risks of cycling and helmet effectiveness.  This included academic research and also the popular media, to examine if that could be a formative factor in cyclists’ perceptions. 

The surveys were analysed using a spreadsheet programme, whilst the interviews were examined for common themes and explicit reasons for attitudes. The results were discussed and interpreted and conclusions drawn.

The main conclusion is that the majority of the people surveyed do have an exaggerated opinion of the effectiveness of cycle helmets, and an exaggerated opinion of the risks of cycling, and that the two are associated.  These perceptions are likely to be caused by exaggerations in the promotional material for helmets, which exaggerates both the risks of cycling and the effectiveness of helmets.

Following on from this, the exaggerations in the promotional material are likely to both prevent some people from cycling because of the fear of the risk, and to induce risk compensatory behaviour in those who chose to cycle and wear a helmet.

Given the overwhelming benefits of cycling, helmet promotion is found to be counterproductive in both economic and public health terms.