Abstract
A recent study claims that participants wearing a bike helmet behave riskier in a computer-based risk task compared to control participants without a bike helmet. We hypothesized that wearing a bike helmet reduces cognitive control over risky behavior. To test our hypothesis, we recorded participants' EEG brain responses while they played a risk game developed in our laboratory. Previously, we found that, in this risk game, anxious participants showed greater levels of cognitive control as revealed by greater frontal midline theta power, which was associated with less risky decisions. Here, we predicted that cognitive control would be reduced in the helmet group, indicated by reduced frontal midline theta power, and that this group would prefer riskier options in the risk game. In line with our hypothesis, we found that participants in the helmet group showed significantly lower frontal midline theta power than participants in the control group, indicating less cognitive control. We did not replicate the finding of generally riskier behavior in the helmet group. Instead, we found that participants chose the riskier option in about half of trials, no matter how risky the other option was. Our results suggest that wearing a bike helmet reduces cognitive control, as revealed by reduced frontal midline theta power, leading to risk indifference when evaluating potential behaviors.
Highlights
Most people wear helmets during cycling, driving a motor bike, or skiing because they are convinced that such gear reduces the risk of head injuries (Ross, Ross, Rahman, & Cataldo, 2010)
In line with our hypothesis, we found that participants in the helmet group showed significantly lower frontal midline theta power than participants in the control group, indicating less cognitive control
Our results suggest that wearing a bike helmet reduces cognitive control, as revealed by reduced frontal midline theta power, leading to risk indifference when evaluating potential behaviors
Summary
Most people wear helmets during cycling, driving a motor bike, or skiing because they are convinced that such gear reduces the risk of head injuries (Ross, Ross, Rahman, & Cataldo, 2010). A few years ago, a well‐known German politician and a world‐famous Formula 1 racer suffered head injuries caused by skiing accidents Both wore a helmet and survived, a person involved in the ski accident with the politician did not wear a helmet and died immediately. The helmet industry in Germany experienced a steep increase in helmet sales (Tödtmann, 2009) These perceived benefits notwithstanding, some research has highlighted an adverse effect of helmet wearing in that people tend to take more risks when wearing a helmet than when not wearing one (for a review, see Adams & Hillman, 2001; Trimpop, 1994; Trimpop & Wilde, 1993). This adverse effect, termed risk compensation (Peltzman, 1975), has been addressed by several related theoretical frameworks including the most popular (Pless, 2016; Trimpop, 1994, 1996) but highly controversial (Evans, 1986; Pless, 2016; Radun, Radun, Esmaeilikia, & Lajunen, 2018)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
