When Even the Cycling Media Misuse Statistics

[PedallingNowhereSlowly]

Whilst browsing t'web in my lunch hour I stumbled upon this article by Emmie Harrison-West:

https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/...tupid-b-tch-it-made-me-ashamed-to-ride-a-bike

Now, I don't disagree - the way that some cyclists use the roads is abysmal. But, I take issue with the exageration of the problem and the misuse of statistics to support that exageration.

Take this:

Cyclists cause just 1-2% of pedestrian deaths in the UK, with cars responsible for 98-99%

Based on my lay-persons knowledge of KSI statistics, that did not seem right . So I checked it. Between 2018 and 2022 (inc.) 2018 ped. deaths were recorded in the official statistics. 9 due to collisions with cyclists. So I make that 0.44%.

But that is 0.44% of pedestrian deaths involved a collision where the other party is a cyclist. That's not the same as saying that cyclists cause 0.44% of pedestrian deaths. For that, we have to trawl through the contributory factors. A quick look suggests to me that in cyclist / pedestrian collisions, cyclists are not going to be responsible for the causal factor in 100% of those incidents. I would be surprised if cyclists were responsible for the causal factor in anywhere near 100%.

In short, I think this article is overstating that rate at which cyclists are responsible for pedestrian deaths by as much as 800%.

The article I've linked, at the point the 1-2% statistic is claimed, links another Cycling Weekly article that says this:

Research by the University of Westminster’s Active Travel Project found that between 2005 and 2018, 548 pedestrians on pavements were killed by vehicles and, of that 548, six were killed by cyclists.

I can't find the study. But again, I suspect this claim is similarly problematic. An active travel project will no doubt be looking at cycling and shared infrastructure and again, it is probably referring to pedestrian/cyclist collisions.

I've not read Cycling Weekly for eons, but I find this standard of reporting to be deeply problematic.

 

[Ian H]

So presumably the 44% dead pedestrian had to be finished off by another vehicle.

 

[mjr]

But that is 0.44% of pedestrian deaths involved a collision where the other party is a cyclist. That's not the same as saying that cyclists cause 0.44% of pedestrian deaths. For that, we have to trawl through the contributory factors.

It's even worse than that. You'd have to trawl through court cases and ideally out-of-court settlements to see what the final most-accepted judgment of fault is, and I don't think that data is summarised in any nice easy-to-analyse form. Researchers get paid to do that sort of difficult compilation and 15 years ago, TRL published https://trl.co.uk/publications/ppr445 and I've not seen anything similar since. It doesn't really dwell on the 0.7% of cyclist casualties where pedestrians were involved, as far as I could spot.

I've not read Cycling Weekly for eons, but I find this standard of reporting to be deeply problematic.

Agreed but it's far more worrying in the mainstream than the comic.

 

[mjr]

So presumably the 44% dead pedestrian had to be finished off by another vehicle.

😖 That's so wrong that it hurts!

 

[presta]

Proportion of all pedestrian deaths:

Research by the University of Westminster’s Active Travel Project found that between 2005 and 2018, 548 pedestrians on pavements were killed by vehicles. That is, about 40 people a year. And of that 548, just 6 were killed by cyclists.

 

[Drago]

To further compound matters, it's only once every 2 years on average where a cyclist is successfully convicted.

Now, there are all sorts of factors at play there, but at face value that's 0.5 pedestrians a year where a cyclist is actually at fault for causing a pedestrian death, which further undermines the article.

I know anecdotally from my own time dibbling that pedestrians stepping out HUA (Head Up Arse) kill more cyclists than the other way round. I've dealt with the former, and variations thereof, several times, but never the latter

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

To further compound matters, it's only once every 2 years on average where a cyclist is successfully convicted.

Now, there are all sorts of factors at play there, but at face value that's 0.5 pedestrians a year where a cyclist is actually at fault for causing a pedestrian death, which further undermines the article.

I know anecdotally from my own time dibbling that pedestrians stepping out HUA (Head Up Arse) kill more cyclists than the other way round. I've dealt with the former, and variations thereof, several times, but never the latter

Yes - it is not only who hit who - but who was to blame

it is also complicated by the shared path concept - so if these pedestrians were on a shared path they MIGHT have suddenly changed direction and and the cyclist collided with them
but the press would report this as pedestrian hit by cyclist which implies that the cyclist was on a pavement when they should be on the road

Of course - the cyclist should be aware - but sometimes there is nothing you can do if someone just changes direction unpredictably - and it is possible that there were other factors - like a head hitting a lamp-post

but whatever - the press report plays into the " all cyclist ......" concept as peddled (sorry) by some of the main press outlets


still quite a small number compared to what you would imagine if you read articles in some press coverage though!