Motorcycle Road Safety Training - A Gender Difference.

Quote: "What would you advise the young rider riding at night?

This applies to all riders. Consider alternative transport!"

That is genuine advice from a page regarding "Motorbike/ Motorcycle Safety and the Young Rider" that I came across on Twitter today. Genuine advice aimed at rider safety

There are some other things that I found of interest. Elsewhere we were discussing gender and training the other day. How about this observation:-

Quote: "From my years training I can state with confidence, that female riders are a lot more concerned with safety and getting it right, than what their male counterparts would like to admit to. This includes females from all race groups in SA > South Africa <. Although both gender groups want to learn, I find that male riders tend to slip up sooner due to ego and other contributing factors such as arrogance, anger and good old negligence. Male riders have a more laid back approach where female riders are more focused or determined to stay alive"

Interesting, I find that individual personality traits are a lot more complex than gender stereotypes. But when we do transfer days onto "big" bikes, more often than not the guys want to race up and down, while the ladies prefer to master braking and control first.

I recently came across a post regarding a University putting people into classifications, I realised I had been doing so for years, but actually there were thousands of variables that I would automatically apply to every student. All along spectrum's rather than specific boxes. Every one is an individual so we have to work with every one individually.

I noticed that often I would model my interactions to that of my students in a way to both make them feel safer and more relaxed In my company to help build trust, while trying to understand their individual issues better. Every individual, thousands of interactions, every one trying to connect and find the same wavelength, There is far more that makes us individuals than what is between our legs. Without that social bonding training is far harder. While it is easy to train Instructors to teach rules and machine handling skills. It's far harder to develop the interactive training skills, with them going undeveloped, lost in the focus on hyper compliance.

One interesting example of differences in students was two Police Officers, both attached to the local Constabularies traffic team, both on the same force. Both doing the same course at the same time, just on different days. Although as different as chalk and cheese. Both had full car driving licences and were to Car Roadcraft Gold RoSPA Advanced Standards. One was a Constable and the other a Chief Inspector.

The constable did ok, A good course, passed her test first time with only minor faults. Good student.

On the 1st day of training the Chief Inspector we were discussing advanced riding theory, how we were not restricted by the width of a car and could use the lane to improve view and lessen cornering angles to corner safer or at higher speeds, also how she could not use what I was teaching her on test as many DVSA Examiners were not trained to that level so would not understand, possibly even failing her test for using advanced skills. She passed her test without fault. Most of the weeks training was spent just enjoying riding in the country building general experience and enjoying each others company.

The South African article goes on to blame the old favourites of distractions and lack of parental guidance, all flawed compliance rhetoric we have listened to on repeat for decades. Adolescents will rebel ( see -The Power and Purpose of the Teenage Brain ). It is what they have evolved to do. Now the chemicals that get released at puberty tend to make males a little more risk adverse, especially when trying to impress, that’s nature, it is shared across species. But only in humans do we fault them for it. Lets give them minimal training on machine handling and tell them to follow the rules. Then fault them when they crash.

"It is not enough to do your best, you must know what to do and then do your best" W Edwards Deming

It troubles me when I see articles shared by people trying to do their best to improve safety, but their efforts have been wasted on repeating the mistakes we have already made.

There was a film made the year I was born 1965. Fortunately some kindly person uploaded it onto Youtube - Look, Signal, Manoeuvre

The message was clear, follow the rules and you will be safe. This was drilled into me doing cycling proficiency. Look, signal, Manoeuvre.

Riding motorcycles in the early 80’s it was “Look, Signal, Look. Manoeuvre”. The extra looked added as looking was considered more important, the second look became the "life saver", But when I became an Instructor, one thing that became obvious was people would look, but would not see. Or another regular “I have looked, I have signalled, now I can manoeuvre”!

Yet this observation did not matter as the nature of the training smoothed out many such intricacies. Humans adopt to the rules. When the restrictive DAS and stepped testing came it, the training stayed the same, just evolved to the vehicle restrictions imposed on it.

The common simple idea of a novice rider being watched over as they built experience in the early days via an experienced riding coach in the real world environment local to where the novice rider lives remains, often despite the hyper compliance imposed upon it.

Excellent for at least giving a rider a safer start, yet over time the rule based focus has floundered as a result of the hyper compliance. While much of the world is still only focused on the compliance and not the Education.

The idea as Compulsory Basic Training (CBT) was introduced to the United Kingdom in 1991, to us Star Rider Instructors it looked like a more relaxed approach to rider training than we had been used to under the part 1 and 2 tests that it replaced. The removal of the restrictive outer area of the Fig 8 part of the part one test area meant we could focus more on training instead of compliance. But unfortunately over the last 30 years the Education has floundered while the Enforcement has flourished. It becomes self perpetuating as the assumption that the rules are what keep people safe fails, more rules get used to fill the gaps.

Most road safety training interventions across the world are focused on the rote learning of rules.

While this is a good place to start regarding things like traffic signs and basic machine handling.

Without explaining the rules and how they apply, including the shortfalls and variables within the system, the rules can become a hindrance. People get bogged down in compliance and post accident hindsight blame on a single road user. Without understanding how the majority manage to avoid each other for the majority of the time. If we look at WHO Statistics ( the favourite of typical road safety rhetoric), then a countries deaths per 100000 road users can be correlated by the amount of interactive training offered at pre test training levels. While the more the country tries to enforce safety, the worse the safety record becomes. Please, look at the statistics yourselves for your country of choice. I welcome people checking the data, it is all in public domain for most countries.

So why is it that the real world interactive training part, the bit built on standard human educational interventions, not being explored more?

When we teach people to swim, do we only learn by watching others drown? If that sounds silly, why is road safety built on post accident hindsight biased rhetoric?

I really wish I had an answer for this. There is much supporting evidence that shows the limitations of the current interventions. In the UK the last 20 years have seen a stagnation in statistics while training has become more about Enforcement and less about Education.

The worst performing countries by the WHO Road Safety Stats have seen year on year increases as an ever increasing focus on Enforcement and Engineering fails to address the safety of the most vulnerable road users who will never afford the safer vehicles or have no need for the higher speed “safer” roads. People install road furniture or reduce speed limits that gives an illusion of safety while missing the reality of how most accidents happen,

Quote:- “There is not enough evidence to conclude that that there has been a significant change in collisions and casualties following the introduction of 20mph limits in residential areas.” gov.uk/government/publications/20-mph-speed-limits-on-roads

We now have a far better understanding of the “Science of being seen”,

We have a plethora of tools at our disposal to better help riders to avoid the most common accidents. Applying strategies to help drivers see us as we approach junctions for starters. Positioning to gain a better view of the road ahead and adjusting our speeds earlier to prepare the bikes for cornering is another. Advanced information gathering to identify hazards emerging from a complex picture. All aimed at improving prediction skills to help riders and all road users avoid the most common reasons for accidents. The prediction and empathy skills being found to be just as important, possibly even more important that the rote learning of rules.

Most riders do a good job of looking after themselves. Most road users will go years without having an accident. Most accidents happen to normal everyday people doing normal everyday things. This is universally evident across the world from multiple data sources.

So why is it still ignored in the pursuit of compliance?

No Surprise / No Accident