Risk Compensation Hypothesis Research Articles

Trend towards Helmet Usage and the Behavior of Riders While Wearing Helmets

Nowadays, it is relatively common to follow traffic rules, such as wearing a helmet and fastening seat belts, but accidents are increasing daily. Concerned with these traffic safety issues, this study focuses on the psychology of bike riders. First, a brief questionnaire is prepared by filtering some significant traffic safety factors. For effective results and analysis, a questionnaire survey (i.e., interviews) is conducted across different road junctions in Sargodha, Pakistan, with the assistance of traffic police. The data is analyzed through a multiple regression analysis, forming a different model for effective outcomes. A risk compensation hypothesis theory is considered; based on the questionnaire designed and the input received from participants, three models are developed with significant variables. The first two models evaluate the physical impact of helmets on riders/cyclists, while the third observes changes (in terms of obeying traffic laws) in behavior when wearing a helmet. It has been observed that cyclists wearing helmets may follow zigzag patterns while wearing helmets, which may cause accidents. Moreover, it has been observed that cyclists wearing helmets may be more responsible regarding traffic rules. These problems should be considered in creating effective traffic safety campaigns and policy making.

Do the vaccinated perform less distancing, mask wearing and hand hygiene? A test of the risk compensation hypothesis in a representative sample during the COVID-19 pandemic

The “risk compensation hypothesis” holds that vaccinated individuals may be less motivated to protect themselves using other COVID-19 mitigation behaviors—e.g., masking, distancing and hand hygiene—given that they may perceive their infection risk to be lower. The current investigation provides an empirical test of the risk compensation hypothesis in the COVID-19 context using prospective data from the Canadian COVID-19 Experiences Survey (CCES). The survey comprised 1,958 unvaccinated and fully vaccinated individuals drawn from a representative sample, using quota sampling to ensure substantial representation of unvaccinated individuals. Two waves of data were collected 6 months apart. Findings revealed that vaccinated individuals performed COVID-19 mitigation behaviors significantly more frequently than their unvaccinated counterparts, and they also showed lower rates of attenuation as the pandemic continued. In summary, our findings do not support the risk compensation hypothesis; instead they support the notion that people adopt vaccination and other protective behaviors in parallel.

Are Risk-Taking and Ski Helmet Use Associated with an ACL Injury in Recreational Alpine Skiing?

According to the risk compensation hypothesis, the use of a ski helmet might provide a false sense of security, resulting in a riskier behavior by skiing faster or more aggressively, which might lead to an increased injury risk. Injury of the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) is a common diagnosis in downhill skiers. Thus, the aim of the study was to evaluate the potential impact of risk-taking and ski helmet use on ACL injury risk in recreational skiing. Eighty-two ACL injured and 446 uninjured skiers with a mean age of 37.3 ± 11.9 years (52% females) were surveyed during the winter season 2018/19 about age, sex, self-reported risk-taking behavior, self-reported skill level, perceived speed, and ski helmet use. Multiple regression analysis revealed that older age (OR: 1.3, 95% CI: 1.2–1.4), riskier behavior (OR: 5.4, 95% CI: 2.8–10.5), and lower skill level (OR: 6.7, 95% CI: 3.4–13.3) were found to be factors associated with ACL injury, while ski helmet use was not. In conclusion, no support for the risk compensation hypothesis was found with regard to ACL injuries. Therefore, we doubt that ski helmet use increases the risk for ACL injury and recommend wearing a ski helmet due to reported protective effects.

Bicycle helmets and risky behaviour: A systematic review

A long-standing argument against bicycle helmet use is the risk compensation hypothesis, i.e., increased feelings of safety caused by wearing a helmet results in cyclists exhibiting more risky behaviour. However, past studies have found helmet wearing is not associated with risky behaviour, e.g., committing a traffic violation was positively associated with a lower frequency of helmet use. There is a lack of consensus in the research literature regarding bicycle helmet use and the risk compensation hypothesis, although this gap in knowledge was identified in the early 2000s. This is the first study to carry out a systematic review of the literature to assess whether helmet wearing is associated with risky behaviour. Two study authors systematically searched the peer-reviewed literature using five research databases (EMBASE, MEDLINE, COMPENDEX, SCOPUS, and WEB OF SCIENCE) and identified 141 unique articles and four articles from other sources. Twenty-three articles met inclusion criteria and their findings were summarised. Eighteen studies found no supportive evidence helmet use was positively associated with risky behaviour, while three studies provided mixed findings, i.e., results for and against the hypothesis. For many of these studies, bicycle helmet wearing was associated with safer cycling behaviour. Only two studies conducted from the same research lab provided evidence to support the risk compensation hypothesis. In sum, this systematic review found little to no support for the hypothesis bicycle helmet use is associated with engaging in risky behaviour.

Does learning about climate change adaptation change support for mitigation?

Many have speculated that increased attention to climate change adaptation will reduce support for mitigation. The Risk Compensation Hypothesis suggests that remedies to reduce the impacts of risky behaviors can unintentionally increase those behaviors. The Risk Salience Hypothesis suggests that information about adaptation may increase the salience of impacts, and therefore increase mitigation support. Experiment 1 presented participants with a news article about an irrigation technology described as a way to improve efficiency (Pure Control), reduce emissions (Mitigation Control), or reduce drought vulnerability (Adaptation). Political moderates in the adaptation condition rated climate change as a higher political priority and were more supportive of a policy to subsidize the technology than those in both controls. Results were not replicated in Experiment 2. These results partially support the Risk Salience Hypothesis. There was no evidence to justify the concern that discussing adaptation will reduce support for mitigation or concern about climate change.

Risk compensation and vaccination: Can getting vaccinated cause people to engage in risky behaviors?

Some believe that vaccinating young women against human papillomavirus (HPV) will increase their risky behavior. In more formal terms, vaccination lowers risk perception, and people compensate for their lower perceived risk by reducing other preventive behaviors. We test several predictions from the risk compensation hypothesis in the context of vaccination behavior. We obtained a random sample of adults (N=705), interviewing them by phone just as the Lyme disease vaccine first became available to the public and again 18 months later. Analyses controlled for age, sex, education, and race. Vaccinated respondents were less likely to continue engaging in two of five protective behaviors after vaccination. The frequency of these protective behaviors did not dip below that among the unvaccinated respondents. We found some evidence of regression (protective behaviors dropping, after vaccination, to levels reported by the unvaccinated cohort). However, we did not find disinhibition (exceeding the risk taking of the unvaccinated cohort), the greater threat to public health. Although we will not know for several years what effect HPV vaccination has on other behaviors, if any, data on other vaccinations can offer critically important information in the interim.

Risk Compensation or Risk Reduction? Seatbelts, State Laws, and Traffic Fatalities*

Objective. The risk compensation hypothesis suggests that drivers enjoying greater safety will drive more recklessly and thereby impose greater risks on nonoccupants. We provide a test of the risk compensation hypothesis in the context of state seatbelt laws and belt use rates.Methods. Fixed‐effects models with policy and demographic variables are estimated using annual state data from 1985 to 2002 to test the effect of seatbelt laws and seatbelt use rates on logged fatality rates for occupants, pedestrians, motorcyclists, and all nonoccupants in separate models.Results. Contrary to the risk compensation hypothesis, the results indicate that both occupants and nonoccupants enjoy greater safety due to state mandatory use laws and increased safety belt use rates.Conclusion. Overall, seatbelt laws and the higher belt use these laws induce do not increase nonoccupant risk exposure. If anything, these laws and the accompanying increase in belt use result in safer driving behavior.

Testing the risk compensation hypothesis for safety helmets in alpine skiing and snowboarding

Objective: The prevalence of helmet use by alpine skiers and snowboarders was estimated and self-reports on risk taking were assessed to test for potential risk compensation when using helmets in...

Bicyclist risks and helmet usage patterns: An analysis of compensatory behavior in a risky recreational activity

This article evaluates the risk- and safety-related behavior of adult bicyclists. Probit regression models are applied to national survey data to determine the relationship between accident risks and helmet use. Compensatory behavior, measured in the form of changes in the likelihood of helmet use, is quantified for discrete changes in risk factors. The results are supportive of the risk compensation hypothesis: changes in the risk of head injury tend to be offset by changes in helmet use. However, the analysis provides no evidence that the magnitude of the compensatory response overwhelms the direct impacts of changes in the risk environment.

The benefit of seat belt legislation in the United Kingdom.

Legislation for compulsory wearing of seat belts by car drivers and front seat passengers has been acclaimed as a major public health advance. Reports from other countries, and two recent evaluative studies in the United Kingdom, have suggested that legislation reduces both deaths and injuries. To assess the effect of the UK law 5 years after its implementation, trends in routine data for 1976-1987 have been reviewed. There were two sources of data: mortality statistics, published by the Office of Population Censuses and Surveys in the quarterly Monitor DH4, and road accident statistics, recorded by the police and published by the Department of Transport. There is a downward trend in deaths over the period, but the data show little impact from the law. One explanation for this lack of effect is the risk compensation hypothesis, which suggests that "safety" improvements are transferred by drivers into increased performance--the amount and speed of travel. Public health policies need to take into account the complex behavioural interactions between travel and safety choices if they are to affect underlying trends.

Public Safety Legislation and the Risk Compensation Hypothesis: The Example of Motorcycle Helmet Legislation

The ‘experiment’ in the United States of America in which twenty-eight states in the latter half of the 1970s repealed their laws which made the wearing of motorcycle helmets compulsory is widely believed to have proved conclusively that helmet legislation is a highly effective public health measure. The principal statistical foundations of this belief are found in a report to Congress by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and in a study by Watson et al. These foundations are examined and found to be open to criticism. The evidence surveyed here suggests that the effect, if any, of helmet legislation on motorcycling fatalities is perverse. The ‘risk compensation theory’ is proffered as a possible explanation of the available evidence.

Goals, Risks, and Choices

Prof. Wilde tells us that the effect of a non-motivational change in the safety environment on the expected accident rate is nil. I suppose that the cautious thing to do is to note that this result is a hypothesis wrapped in an interesting, and perhaps plausible model of behavioral dynamics. We should call for additional empirical and theoretical work, but the major purpose of my comment is to suggest directions for X tracting additional insight from existing literature. An interesting revelation from Wilde's own perusal of the literature is that some of the most recent research was performed without explicit guidance from a risk compensation hypothesis. Risk compensation concepts appear to have developed along independent but parallel paths in at least three social disciplines. The work in psychology, sociology, and economics is faithful to the usual modes of thought in each of these areas, yet what is common among these approaches is much more important than their differences. Prof. Wilde makes statements about underlying variables that determine the risk target at an individual level. This is where his work as a psychologist is most closely linked to that of other disciplines; however, his emphasis on the behavioral dynamics at the individual level -- the perception, decision, and controlled skilled used by the individual in adapting to a target level of risk. This behavior dynamic is been aggregated over individuals and time to obtain a model relating risk targets to accident rates.... Language: en