↓ Skip to main content

Distraction of cyclists: how does it influence their risky behaviors and traffic crashes?

Overview of attention for article published in PeerJ, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
5 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
27 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
72 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Distraction of cyclists: how does it influence their risky behaviors and traffic crashes?
Published in
PeerJ, September 2018
DOI 10.7717/peerj.5616
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sergio A. Useche, Francisco Alonso, Luis Montoro, Cristina Esteban

Abstract

Undisputedly, traffic crashes constitute a public health concern whose impact and importance have been increasing during the past few decades. Specifically, road safety data have systematically shown how cyclists are highly vulnerable to suffering traffic crashes and severe injuries derived from them. Furthermore, although the empirical evidence is still very limited in this regard, in addition to other human factors involved in cycling crashes, distractions while cycling appear to be a major contributor to the road risk of cyclists. The main objectives of this study were, first, to explore the prevalence and trends of cycling distractions within an international sample of bike users, and second, to determine the influence of such distractions on road crashes suffered by cyclists, simultaneously considering the explanatory role of risky behaviors (errors and traffic violations) as potentially mediating variables between cycling distractions and traffic crashes. For this cross-sectional study, we analyzed the data obtained from 1,064 cyclists-61.2% male and 38.8% female-from 20 different countries, who answered an on-line questionnaire on cycling-related features, habits, behaviors and accidents. The prevalence of different cycling distractions oscillated between 34.7% and 83.6%. The most common distractions were those related to the behavior of other users, physical elements of the road, weather conditions and phone calls. Age trends and differences were also found, thus establishing a positive association between age and distractibility during cycling. Furthermore, the effect of distractions on traffic crashes of cyclists was significant when tested together with age, risk perception and risky behaviors on the road. The results of this study support the hypotheses that distractions have a major prevalence among bike users, and that they play a significant role in the prediction of the traffic crash rates of cyclists, through the mediation of risky behaviors.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 72 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 72 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 26%
Student > Master 11 15%
Researcher 10 14%
Student > Bachelor 5 7%
Other 4 6%
Other 7 10%
Unknown 16 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 11 15%
Psychology 7 10%
Computer Science 6 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 7%
Design 4 6%
Other 16 22%
Unknown 23 32%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 December 2019.
All research outputs
#1,754,652
of 16,367,839 outputs
Outputs from PeerJ
#2,205
of 9,737 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#45,788
of 277,932 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PeerJ
#68
of 294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 16,367,839 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 9,737 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 17.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 277,932 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 294 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.