IN F O R M A T IO N T O USERS This material was produced from a m icro film copy o f the original docum ent. W hile the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this docum ent have been used, the q u ality is heavily dependent upon the q u ality o f the original subm itted. The follow ing explanation o f techniques is provided to help you markings or patterns w hich m ay appear on this reproduction. understand 1 .T h e sign or "ta rg e t" fo r pages apparently lacking from the docum ent photographed is "Missing Page(s)". I f it was possible to obtain th e missing page(s) or section, th ey are spliced in to the film along w ith adjacent pages. This m ay have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent pages to insure you com plete c o n tin u ity. 2. When an image on the film is obliterated w ith a large round black m ark, it is an indication th a t the photographer suspected th a t the copy m ay have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. Y o u w ill find a good image o f the page in the adjacent fram e. 3. When a m ap, drawing or chart, etc., was part o f the m aterial being photographed the photographer follow ed a defin ite m ethod in "sectioning" the m aterial. I t is custom ary to begin photoing at the upper left hand corner o f a large sheet and to continue photoing fro m le ft to right in equal sections w ith a small overlap. I f necessary, sectioning is continued again — beginning below the firs t row and continuing on until com plete. 4. The m a jo rity o f users indicate th a t the textual content is o f greatest value, however, a som ewhat higher q u ality reproduction could be made from "photographs" if essential to the understanding o f the dissertation. Silver prints o f "photographs" m ay be ordered a t additional charge by w riting the O rder D ep artm ent, giving the catalog num ber, title , author and specific pages you wish reproduced. 5. P LE A S E received. NO TE: Some pages m ay have indistinct print. Film ed as Xerox University M icrofilm s 300 North Zoeb Road Ann Arbor, M ichigan 48106 I I 74-13,992 YOUNG, Frank Crider, 1944A STUDY OF SELECTED FACTORS RELATED TO ACCIDENT INVOLVEMENT OF MOTORCYCLES IN INGHAM COUNTY, MICHIGAN, IN 1971. Michigan State University, Ph.D., 1973 Education, general U n iversity M icrofilm s, A XEROX C om pany , A n n A rb o r, M ic h ig a n A STUDY OF SELECTED FACTORS RELATED TO ACCIDENT INVOLVEMENT OF MOTORCYCLES IN INGHAM COUNTY, MICHIGAN, IN 1971 By Frank C. Young A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1973 A STUDY OF SELECTED FACTORS RELATED TO ACCIDENT INVOLVEMENT OF MOTORCYCLES IN INGHAM COUNTY, MICHIGAN, IN 1971 By Frank C. Young Motorcycling has become increasingly popular for transportation and recreation in this country, and, as a result, its growth has been extremely rapid. The year 1964-6 5 shows the greatest percentage of increase in the registration of two-wheeled vehicles. By the end of 1971 there were 3,29 3,4 00 registered two-wheeled vehicles in the United States. Deaths and injuries from motorcycle acci­ dents more than doubled between 1963 and 1967. This fact is particularly alarming when it is understood that most people riding motorcycles are under the age of twenty-five. The primary purpose of this study was to determine the strength of relationship between selected variables and the severity of the accident using the medical cost as the index for severity. The secondary purpose of the study was to seek out and show possible causal factors related to motorcycle accidents. Fifteen case studies were presented to give a better picture of how the motorcycle accidents were F r a n k C. Young occurring. These case studies were selected by accident category and were typical of all the other accidents. Along with each case study, a situational diagram of the accident was presented. The sample population of this study consisted of 100 persons who were involved in motorcycle accidents in Ingham County, Michigan, in 19 71. They were randomly selected from a total universe of 323. males and 2 females in the sample. There were 98 The data were gathered between March 15, 1972 and August 15, 19 72. The persons who were randomly selected for this study were sent letters of introduction and were tele­ phoned to set up a personal interview. The interview lasted approximately twenty-five minutes. At the time of the interview, the subjects were assured that the infor­ mation they gave would be confidential. The subjects ranged from fifteen to seventy-one years of age. All were residents of the state of Michigan and had varying degrees of educational achievement. The hypotheses were tested by employing the Pear­ son Product Moment Correlation Test. An appropriate test of significance table for correlation coefficients was used to determine significance at the appropriate degree of freedom. The .05 level of significance was predeter­ mined to be acceptable in this study. Statistical analysis of the data revealed: F r a n k C. Young No significance was found when the medical costs of the accidents were correlated with any of the seventeen variables. The major findings of the secondary purpose of the were as follows: Seventy per cent of the motorcyclists were between the ages of fifteen and twenty-four years. Forty-eight per cent of the motorcyclists had one year or less of motorcycle riding experience. Ninety-five per cent generally rode their motor­ cycles during the hours of 12-8 P.M. and, during this time, 70 per cent of the accidents occurred. Ninety-three per cent of the motorcyclists said they rode mostly on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays. In 9 5 per cent of the cases the motorcyclists had been riding for a period of two hours or less prior to the accident. Almost one-half (46%) of the motorcycle accidents occurred in a residential area. Fifty per cent of the motorcycle accidents occurred on a two-lane roadway. Ninety per cent of the accidents occurred on a level roadway. Eighty— two per cent of the accidents occurred on a straight roadway. Sixty-three per cent of the accidents occurred during daylight. F r a n k C. Y o u n g 11. Ninety-two per cent of the accidents occurred on a dry road surface. 12. Only seven interviewees reported any drinking just prior to the accident, and only one reported using alcohol and drugs. 13. Fifty-one per cent of the motorcyclists reported only one hour of motorcycle riding instruction, and in 58 per cent of the cases, this instruction was given by friends or a motorcycle dealer. 14. One-fourth of the motorcyclists reported receiv­ ing one hour of motorcycle instruction in a driver education program. 15. The motorcyclist in 22 per cent of the cases was charged with a violation? the most frequent vio­ lation was failure to yield 16. (7). The motorcyclists were asked to give advice on how to avoid the accident they were involved in and in 50 per cent of the cases they reported to ride more defensively, watching out for auto­ mobiles . 17. The motorcyclists were asked to give the major cause of the accident in which they were involved in and in 47 per cent of the cases they reported an automobile either pulled out in front of or turned left in front of them. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS To Dr. Robert O. Nolan, my major advisor and chairman of m y doctoral guidance committee for his advice and encouragement. To the other members of my guidance committee, Dr. Robert E. Gustafson, Dr. George W. Ferree, and Dr. Louis A. Romano, for their many helpful suggestions. To Dr. James Counts who helped in initiating this s tudy. To Lt. L. C. Hathaway of the Safety and Traffic Division, Michigan State Police for his sincere interest and aid in gathering the names and addresses of the par­ ticipants in this study. To the various police departments in Ingham County, Michigan who gave their permission for this study to be done. To Charles Dreveskracht of the Highway Traffic Safety Center for his efforts in programming the data for computer analysis. To Dana Morris for time and effort spent in edit­ ing this study. ii To Dr. Henry Willis of Delta State College for his advice and aid with the statistical analysis of the study. To Wallace Price for his aid in illustrating the case studies contained in this study. To the 100 individuals who participated in the interviews that furnished the basic data for this study. To ray parents, Mr. and Mrs. Troy W. Young, and my wife's parents, Mr. and Mrs. Tom G. Waldrop, who offered encouragement and who made all my efforts worthwhile. To my loving wife, Judy, whose assistance, advice, and encouragement in all phases of this study made a most difficult task much easier. TA B L E OF C O N T E N T S Ch ap t e r I. Page THE P R O B L E M ................................. 1 Statement of the Problem ................. Importance of the S t u d y .......... Assumption........................... Delimitations....................... Definition of T e rm s................. Organization of the S tudy.......... II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE............. 6 7 7 8 8 9 11 Popularity of Motorcycles.......... 12 Factors of Accident Involvement of Motorcycles........................ 13 The Young M a l e .................... 21 Personality Fact or s................. 29 A g e .................................. 33 Motorcycle Size andAccident Involvement. 35 Visibility of Motorcycles.......... Severity of Motorcycle Accidents . . . Solutions tothe P r o b l e m ..................... Summary.............................. 44 III. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY . . . ANALYSIS OF THE D A T A ................. 42 48 51 52 58 59 Data Citing the Intercorrelations of the Study V a r i a b l e s ................. 59 Data Relative to the Possible Causal Factors of Motorcycle Accidents . . . Case S t u d i e s ........................ 100 Summary.............................. 132 iv 36 48 Research Questions to be Answered . . . Sample Selection.................... 49 Development of the Instrument . . . . Procedure for Collecting the Data . . . Treatment of the D a t a .............. 53 Summary........................................ IV. 34 62 Chapter V. Pa ge SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS . . S u m m a r y ............................ C o n c l u s i o n s ......................... Implications......................... Recommendations for Further Study. . D i s c u s s i o n ......................... 133 133 137 138 14 0 141 BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................... 144 APPENDICES Appendix A. Participating Police Agencies......... B. Personal Interview Questionnaire. C. Letter of I n t r o d u c t i o n ................ v . 154 . . 155 160 L I S T OF TA B L E S Table 1. 2. 3. Page Five-year Driving Record, Oregon Males ( 1 9 5 7 - 1 9 6 2 ) .............................. Frequency with Which Certain Causative Factors Occur in Motorcycle Accidents 16 . 38 Determining the Case Studies Found in this R e s e a r c h ........................... 56 Intercorrelations of Medical Costs of the Accident and Other Study Variables . . 61 Sex of the Persons Involved in Motorcycle Accidents................................. 62 6. Age of Motorcyclists........................ 63 7. Educational Level and Occupation of Motorcyclists ........................... 64 4. 5. 8. Month the Motorcycle Accident Occurred. . 65 9. Day of the Month the Accident Occurred. . 66 10. Day of the Week the Accident Occurred . . 67 11. Medical Costs of the Motorcycle Accidents. 68 12. Riding Experience of Motorcyclists in M on t h s ..................................... 69 13. Hours of Riding per Week of Motorcyclists. 70 14. Does the Motorcyclist Ride Everyday. 70 15. . . Time of Day the Motorcyclist Generally R i d e s ..................................... vi 71 Table Page 16. Time of the A c c i d e n t .................. 72 17. Purpose of the M o t o r c y c l e ............ 72 18. Day of the Week When Riding Most Likely O c c u r s ................................ 73 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Length of Time Riding the Motorcycle When the Accident Occurred .................... 74 Kind of Locality Where the Accident O c c u r r e d ................................. 74 Motorcyclist Generally Riding in His Home C o u n t y ................................ 75 First Time in the Area Where the Accident O c c u r r e d ............................ 75 Occurrences of Riding on the Road Where the Accident Occurred .................... 76 24. Type of Roadway......................... 77 25. Type of Road S u r f a c e .................. 77 26. Vertical Contour of the Roadway 27. Horizontal Contour of the Roadway. 28. Highway Condition ........................... 79 29. Light Conditions 80 30. Weather Conditions................... 31. Condition of the Road S u r f a c e ........ 32. Riding with Headlight On. 33. Reduced Visibility at the Time of the A c c i d e n t ............................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 . 80 81 . . 34. Lack of Signs Where the Accident Occurred . 35. Distractions at the Time the Accident O c c u r r e d ............................. vii 78 82 82 83 83 Table 36. Page Action Taken to Reduce the Severity of the A c c i d e n t ..................................... 84 Motorcyclist Upset or Worried Just Prior to the Accident................................. 84 38. Trip O r i g i n a t i o n ............................... 85 39. Trip D e s t i n a t i o n ............................... 85 40. Riding Differently After the Accident . . . 86 37. 41. Anything Mechanically Wrong with the M o t o r c y c l e ................................. 86 42. Drinking Prior to the A c c i d e n t .............. 87 43. What Drugs Were T a k e n ........................ 87 44. Use of Alcohol and Drugs Prior to the A c c i d e n t ..................................... 88 45. Hours of Motorcycle Riding Instruction. . . 89 46. Type of Motorcycle Riding Instruction . . . 90 47. Type of Motorcycle Riding Instructor 90 48. Completion of a Driver Education Program . 49. Number of Hours of Motorcycle Instruction in the Driver Education Program . . . . 92 Familiarity with Motorcycle Regulations in M i c h i g a n .............................. 92 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. Motorcycle Insured . . . ........................... . 91 93 Motorcyclist Wearing Protective Gear at the Time of the A c c i d e n t ....................... 94 Motorcyclist Took a Special Operator's E x a m i n a t i o n ................................. 94 Motorcycle Owned by the Interviewee. 95 vi ii . . . Table Page 55. Thought Just Before the Accident Occurred . 96 56. Violation the Motorcyclist was Charged with in Connection with the Accident . . 97 57. 58. Advice of Motorcyclists to Prevent the A c c i d e n t ............................. 98 Causes of the Motorcycle Accident as Stated by the Interviewee............ 99 ix L I S T OF FIG URE S Figure Page 1. Car Pulled in Front of Motorcycle . . . . 103 2. Car Pulled in Front of Motorcycle . . . . 105 3. Motorcycle Pulled in Front of Car . . . . 107 4. Car Turned Left in Front of Motorcycle . . 109 5. Car Turned Left in Front of Motorcycle . . Ill 6. Car Turned Into M o t o r c y c l e ................. 113 7. Cycle Turned Into C a r ........................ 115 8. Ran Off R o a d w a y ............................... 117 9. Ran Off R o a d w a y ............................... 119 10. Over-turning in R o a d w a y ..................... 121 11. Over-turning in R o a d w a y .................... 123 12. Cycle Hit Object in R o a d w a y ................. 12 5 13. Rear-end Collision ........................... 127 14. Motorcycle Hit Car from R e a r ................. 129 15. Cycle Hit Parked C a r ........................ 131 x CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM The motorcycle first appeared in America in the early 19 00's, but it was not until the 19 50's that the motorcycle began to emerge as a problem in the American traffic system. In 1956 motorcycle registrations in the United States totaled 425,000. Registrations had increased to 575,000 in 1960, and to 660,000 in 1962. Then, in 1964, the number of registered two-wheeled vehicles jumped to about 984,000 and by the end of 1965 to 1,381,000. The year 19 64-65 showed the greatest percentage of increase in registration of two-wheeled vehicles. In December of 1971 there were 3,29 3,40 0 registered two-wheeled vehicles in the United States.^ To show the numerical comparison between motorcycles and automobiles in the United States, the motor­ cycles are outnumbered approximately thirty-five to one. In the United States there is approximately one motorcycle ^National Safety Council, Accident Facts National Safety Council, 1972), p. 56. 1 (Chicago: 2 in every ten driveways. In the state of Michigan, motor- cycle registrations have increased 93 per cent since 1966. The foregoing statistics, do not of course, 2 indicate how many people are actually riding these machines, and this will not definitely be known until all states have special motorcycle licensing laws. per machine to four or five. Estimates range from one person There are at least two or three million and this has made motorcycles a serious con­ cern in highway traffic safety in the United States. The death rate in the United States for motorcycle operators in 1971 was estimated to be about 20 deaths per 100,000,000 miles of motorcycle travel. This compared with a death rate of 4.7 for all motor vehicles which included 3 pedestrian and non-occupant deaths. In the state of Michigan in 1971 the death rate for motorcycle operators per 100,000,000 miles traveled was 28.9. This compared with a death rate of 4.09 for all 4 motor vehicles; thus, the death rate for motorcycle operators is approximately seven times the death rate for all motor vehicle operators. 2 Department of State Police, Michigan Traffic Accident Facts (East Lansing: Department of State Police, 1970), p. 14. 3 National Safety Council, Accident F a c t s , p. 56. 4 Department of State Police, Michigan Traffic Accident Facts. 3 Motorcycling has become increasingly popular for transportation and recreation in this country and as a result its growth has been extremely rapid. Probably the major reason for the increased popularity of motorcycles is the low cost of purchasing and of maintaining such vehicles. The price range is such that every teenager with a part-time job can afford one. The relatively in­ expensive cost of both foreign and American-made cycles has resulted in many parents buying them for their children instead of the greater expense of allowing the teenager use of the family car. For the most part the money spent just on automobile insurance for the teenager would pay for a quality cycle. Because of the cost factor involved, many of the younger persons will purchase the small, light­ weight motorcycles. Other contributing factors concerning the increase in motorcycling range from times of national prosperity to population explosion. It is the younger persons who are purchasing, maintaining, and using the millions of motor­ cycles on our already crowded roads. This increase in motorcycle population has brought forth many problems to the traffic situation. Deaths and injuries from motorcycle accidents more than doubled between 1963 and 1967. 5 5 This fact is particularly alarming National Safety Council, Accident Facts. 4 when it is understood that most people are under the age of twenty-five. The motorcycle in the traffic environment takes on grave dimensions in view of the fact that since 1960 the rate of fatalities has increased at about the same rate as the number of motorcycles. The death rate and injuries of motorcycle operators has been given considerable publicity by many groups and individuals in recent years. Law enforcement agencies, driver licensing authorities, legislatures, doctors, motor­ cycle dealers, insurance companies, and parents are just some of the groups who are alarmed at the death rate and disabling injuries that are the results of motorcycle acci­ dents . Theresa Wallach, a motorcycle dealer and motor­ cycle riding instructor, seems to think that "most acci­ dents happen on the trip home from the motorcycle dealer's place of business. It is Ms. Wallach's contention that no one should ride a motorcycle in traffic until it becomes as automatic as breathing="® Some states are enacting laws to control the licensing of motorcycle operators, but in reality, motor­ cycle traffic safety legislation is not keeping up with the tremendous growth in motorcycle registrations. Accident record bureaus are reporting increased numbers ®Janet Clark, "Coexisting with the Car: Handy Tips for Two-Wheel Survival," Detroit Free Press, June 6, 1971. 5 of accidents. Motor vehicle administrators have been urged to develop special licenses for motorcycle operators and special driver examinations for cyclists. Although persons who drive trucks, buses, and other commercial vehicles are required to have special operator's license and strict government control is re­ quired before one can fly an airplane, a check of the licensing and operating laws for motorcycle operator's license for several states revealed a wide variety of minimum insurance coverage, minimum experience and edu­ cation, and licensing requirements, even though the machines themselves ranged from small-sized, low-powered models to large, powerful machines. The result is that many operators are insufficiently educated and possess only minimal skills in operating motorcycles. Every state must now offer a comprehensive driver education program in order to meet the standards set forth by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Un­ fortunately, thousands of young people buying motorcycles are on their own insofar as learning to operate a motor­ cycle is concerned. This accounts for the large number of accidents involving motorcycle operators during their first few months of operation. There would seem to be a need for additional legis­ lation as well as some revision of the old legislation regarding the operation of a motorcycle on public highways. 6 There is a need to update and expand the licensing pro­ cedures for persons who operate motorcycles. It would also seem that there should be more edu­ cational programs for persons who are intending to operate a motorcycle. The programs will hopefully become more evident as this study progresses. Statement of the Problem The primary objective of the study was to collect and analyze data which would indicate the strength of relationship between seventeen different variables and the severity of the accident, using medical costs as the index of severity. The variables of concern in this study were as follows: 1. Sex 2. Age 3. Educational Level 4. Motorcycle Riding Experience 5. Time of the Accident 6. Type of Roadway 7. Type of Surface of Roadway 8. Highway Condition 9. Weather Condition 10. Alcohol 11. Drugs 12. Alcohol and Drugs 13. Hours of Motorcycle Riding Instruction 7 14. Wearing a Helmet 15. Wearing Goggles or Face Shield 16. Wearing Boots 17. Wearing Protective Clothing The secondary purpose of the study was to seek out and show possible causal factors related to motorcycle accidents. Importance of the Study With the accidents and injuries to motorcycle operators increasing each year, every feasible method of prevention should be employed to curtail the rate. And, since traffic accidents are far more common than other types of accidents, the necessity for the development and 7 improvement of preventive measures is imperative. Factors involved in motorcycle accidents should be identified so that intelligent recommendations relating to new legis­ lative and educational needs can be made. Assumption It was assumed that all the data collected through the personal interviews are true and factual to the best knowledge of the person answering the questionnaire. ^Caroline E. Preston and Stanley Harris, "Psy­ chology of Drivers in Traffic Accidents," Journal of Applied Psychology, XLIX (1965), 284. 8 Delimitations This study is intended to provide information de­ rived from motorcycle accidents labeled "traffic" by the law enforcement agencies of Ingham County and the Michigan State Police. These accidents are those which occurred on a public street or highway, or on the right-of-way of a public street or highway. "Non-traffic" accidents are not included as a part of the study because of the possibility of confusing the data about the two when making interpre­ tations. These accidents should be the subject of a separ­ ate study. This study, therefore, represents only a part of the overall motorcycle problem. This study is confined to motorcycle "traffic" accidents that occurred in Ingham County, Michigan, in the year 1971. In addition, the motorcyclist selected for an interview had to be a resident of the state of Michigan. Definition of Terms Motorcycle— A two-wheeled cycle with more than five-brake horsepower. Traffic Accident or Accident— An accident which includes a motorcycle and is deemed by a law enforcement agency to be a "traffic" accident (as opposed to a "non­ traffic" accident). Registration--All motorcycles that are required by Michigan law to be registered with the Secretary of State's Office. 9 Accident Report— The UD-10 accident report form which is required to be used by all police officers re­ porting vehicle accidents in the state of Michigan. Injuries— Only those injuries caused by motorcycle accidents. Vehicle— (a) Mechanical: machine; (b) Physical: moving parts of the structure of the machine. Severity of the Accident— Medical costs of the accident. Causal Factors— Those things that are relevant to the cause of motorcycle accidents. Road or Roadway— That portion of a highway which is improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular p travel, exclusive of shoulder or berm. Organization of the Study In Chapter II a review of the pertinent literature will be presented. Chapter III comprises the design of the study and the methodology involved in the gathering of data for presentation. The universe is described as well as the sample used for personal interviews. 0 J. Stannard Baker and William R. Stebbins, Jr., Dictionary of Highway Traffic (Evanston, Illinois: Traffic Institute, Northwestern University, 1964), p. 196. 10 Chapter IV includes an analysis of the data de­ rived from personal interviews. The data will be pre­ sented in tabular form to depict particular relationships and accident facts. Chapter V will include the summary, conclusions, recommendations, recommendations for further study, and discussion. C H A P T E R II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE In Chapter I the problem of motorcycle accidents was presented along with the definitions, delimitations, and organization of the study. This chapter will contain a review of literature related to motorcycle accidents. The organization of this chapter is as follows: duction, popularity of motorcycles, intro­ factors of accident involvement of motorcycles, the young male, personality factors, age, motorcycle size and accident involvement, visibility of motorcycles, severity of motorcycle accidents, solutions to the problem, and summary. The literature revealed many studies related to police accident reports and motorcycles. were of a statistical nature. These studies There were also a number of studies conducted in foreign countries as well as in the United States involving the injuries received by motorcycle riders. Research dealing with exposure to potential h a z a r d s , the guilt of motorcyclists in accidents, a motorcyclist's riding experience, and the attitudes of motorcyclists were 11 12 generally available from other countries. With one ex­ ception, research in these general areas for the most part has not been conducted in this country. Johnson's research was concerned with case studies of motorcycle accidents in three Illinois counties in 1967. 9 Popularity of Motorcycles During the years 1954 to 1966, there was a 338 per cent increase in the number of registered motorcycles in the United S t a t e s . M a n y prominent authorities in the traffic safety and motor vehicle field felt that by 1970 there would be approximately 1,000,000 motorcycles in the United States. As of 1972, the number of registrations totaled 3,29 3,4 00. This would seem to indicate that the popularity of motorcycles increased at a much faster rate than was anticipated a few years ago. Because of low initial cost and economy of operation, light-weight motor­ cycles now comprise an increasingly significant portion of the total number of motor vehicles in the cities and suburbs of the entire nation. 11 9 Duane R. Johnson, "A Case Study of Motorcycle Accidents in Three Illinois Counties" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1968) . ^^D. W. Clark and John H. Morton, "The Motorcycle Accident: A Growing Problem," Journal of Trauma, II (March, 1971) , 230-37. "^Anthony L. Ellison, "The Motorcycle Problem" (address given at the Southern Safety Conference, Traffic Enforcement Section, Richmond, Virginia, March 6, 1967). 13 Prior to 1963, motorcycle registrations had not increased very rapidly. Then in 1963 and following, tre­ mendous increases began to take place each year as more and more people were buying motorcycles. 12 In 19 67, Yamaha dealers were told that there were 3 million poten­ tial motorcycle purchasers in the United States each year. 13 In Los Angeles County alone it was reported that there was one motorcycle for every 169 persons in 1962, but by 19 65 it had increased to one motorcycle for every 73 persons. 14 Factors of Accident Involvement of Motorcycles According to Baker's multi-disciplinary pilot study of accidents in Evanston, Illinois, factors con­ tributing to accidents might be assigned to seven cate­ gories : 1. 2. 3. Deficiencies in the design of the road and traffic control systems. Obstructions to the drivers' and pedestrians' views. Social interaction between drivers and their oassenaers. 12 United States Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Motorcycles in the United States— Popularity, Accidents, Injury Control (W ash ington , eT.'c Y: Government Printing O f f i c e , 1966), p. 6 . ^ U n i v e r s a l Underwriters Insurance Company, "Facts on Cycle Safety that Can Help You Sell" (talk delivered at Yamaha Dealer Schools, Kansas City, Missouri, 1967), p. 1. 14 Los Angeles County, "A Survey on Motorcycles In volved in Traffic Accidents" (unpublished report, Los Angeles, 1965), p. 1. 14 4. 5. 6. 7. Misconceptions relating to the drivers' knowledge. Inaccurate expectancies concerning the actions of other drivers or pedestrians. Social forces. Common factors in uncommon configurations. Baker evidently explored more deeply than the typically reported d r i v e r s ' actions, conditions or even violations. In each accident investigation, Baker found an average of 4.3 contributing factors p r e s e n t . ^ The motorcycle accident situation is serious, is growing, and is reaching epidemic proportions in the United States. The etiological agent, or causal factor, is the machine itself. 17 In 1967 Duane Johnson conducted a case study analysis of fifty motorcycle accidents in three Illinois counties by interviewing both the cyclist and the driver of the other vehicle when another vehicle was in­ volved. There were thirty-two such cases. In thirty-two cases 25 per cent involved a motorist turning left in front of a motorcyclist. When one vehicle cut another one off, motorists were at fault in 92 per cent of the 15 J. Stannard Baker, "Case Studies of Traffic Accidents," Traffic Safety Research Review, V (December, 1961), 16. 16 Leon M. Goldstein, "Research in Traffic Accident Prevention: An Overview of Research Supported by the Public Service, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare," Traffic Safety Research Review, XI (June, 1967), 56. 17 John J. O'Mara, "Motorcycle Accidents— An Epi­ demic" (paper read before Highway Safety Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Washington, D.C., January 18, 1967), p. 88. 15 cases. One-sixth of the fifty motorcyclists had less than one month's riding experience. The motorcyclists' median driving experience was three years, while that of the motorists was ten years. Motorcyclists had greater acci18 dent-violation experience than the motorists did. Johnson also found that motorcyclists often rode in the middle of their lane where grease on the road made stopping more difficult. They failed to use their front brakes in 2 5 per cent of the cases and occasionally they panicked. Practically none drove with their headlight on during the daylight hours. Only 4 per cent of the motor­ cyclists wore safety helmets and injury occurred to 88 per 19 cent of the drivers and to all of their passengers. The California Highway Patrol surveyed 542 motorcycle accidents for equipment modifications in 1969. 20 The following five modifications made by the operator were surveyed: (1) extended front forks, (3) raised foot rests, no front brakes. (2 ) lowered seat, (4) irregular handlebars, and (5) It was found that about 1.3 per cent of the accidents were due to these equipment modifications. 18 Johnson, "Case Study of Motorcycle Accidents," abstract. 20 Motorcycle Accident Survey (Sacramento: fornia Highway Patrol, January, 197 0), p. 2. Cali­ 16 The data indicated that the modifications tended to increase the accident potential, but the number of cases was too small to be conclusive. Of the motorcycles surveyed, 7.7 per cent had equipment modifications. Only 3.7 per cent of the motor­ cycles had only one equipment modification while 4.0 per cent had two or more modifications. 21 Motorcyclists who also drive automobiles were in­ volved in accidents in Oregon. These motorcyclists had a higher accident and moving violation conviction rate dur­ ing the five years preceding the accident than a random sample of non-motorcyclist male drivers of the same age. This is shown in Table 1. The motorcyclists were very likely cited for speeding in the last police contact preceding the accident studies. 22 TABLE 1.— Five-year driving record, Oregon males 1962).a Convictions Accidents Age MoLorcyclists 20-24 25-34 35 up 1. 37 1 . 00 1.21 {19 57- Others 1.12 .89 .68 Motorcyclists 4.26 2.87 1.14 Others 2.44 1.62 .95 ^ o e l F. Kaestner, Motorcycle Accident S t udy, Department of January 1 to July 31, 1963 {Salem, Oregon: Motor Vehicles, 1963), p. 6 . 22 Noel F. Kaestner, Motorcycle Accident Study, January 1 to July 31, 19 63 (Salem, Oregon: Department of Motor Vehicles, 19 63) , p. 6 . 17 In the state of Washington in 1964, speeding vio­ lations made up 4 3.4 per cent of the violations in motorcycle accidents. 23 In 1965 the speeding violations in motorcycle accidents in Washington had dropped slightly 24 to 4 0.7 per cent. In Los Angeles, a highly populated urban area, speeding violations made up 9 .2 per cent of the violations in 1965, while improper left turns at intersections were 19.3 per cent, and entering a "through" highway were 25 10.8 per c ent. When motorcyclists were in an accident with an­ other vehicle, the motorcyclists were less likely to be at fault than the motorists according to three studies. was found that the blame rested with the motorists: It 63.9 per cent in Los Angeles County, 7 0 per cent in the state of Washington, and more than 60 per cent in Toronto. 26 23 Washington State Patrol, Summary of Motorcycle Accidents Occurring in the Rural Areas of Washington 19 64 ^Olympia: Washington State Patrol, 1965), pT 1. 24 Washington State Patrol, Summary of Motorcycle Accidents Occurring in the Rural Areas of Washington 1965 (Olympia: Washington State Patr o l , 1966), p. 2. 25 p. Los Angeles County, "Survey on Motorcycles," 3. 26 I bid.; "Meeting the Motorcycle Menace," Journal of American Insurance, XLIV (April, 1967), 24; Stuart M u n r o , "The Deadliest Vehemence" (a paper on Motorcycle Safety, Ottawa Safety Council, Ottawa, Canada, 1967), p. 11. (Mimeographed.) 18 A study in New York found that in 46.3 per cent of the accidents in which a vehicle and a motorcycle were in­ volved, one vehicle cut the other off. The other vehicles 27 cut off the motorcyclists 83 per cent of the time. On March 21, 1967, the New York Times reported " . . . car drivers rarely grant the motorcyclists the courtesies of safety extended to the other vehicle." 28 A motorcycle study conducted by Waller et a l ., at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill during the academic year 1966-67, was concerned with the mileage 29 driven by students at the university. Odometer readings were taken several times during the year. From these odo­ meter readings estimates of daily mileage were made. From these readings and estimates the following conclusions seemed to be true: (1) undergraduate students had a greater proportion of high mileage drivers than graduate students, (2) single students had a higher proportion of high mileage vehicles, (3) undergraduate single students had the greatest proportion of high mileage drivers while graduate married students had the least, 1967 (4) drivers of 27 Department of Motor Vehicles, Accident Facts (Albany: Department of Motor Veh i c l e s , 19 67), pT 18. 28 M u n r o , "Deadliest Vehemence," pp. 23-24. 29 P. F. Waller, Patricia Z. Barry, and W. S. Rouse, Motorcycles. I. Estimated Mileage and Its Param­ eters (Chapel H i l l : The University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center, March, 19 68), p. 1. 19 the lighest weight motorcycles traveled less than drivers with heavier motorcycles, (5) students who lived the greatest distance away from campus were more likely to be high mileage drivers than students who lived closer to campus.30 Students who were involved in accidents were different from the group as a whole in that many of them were unmarried. High mileage motorcycle operators were involved in more accidents than the other groups. The findings of this study indicated that motor­ cycles may travel between 4,500-7,000 miles per year with the greatest number of miles being accumulated in the summer months. But the accident rate per miles driven goes up during the winter months. 31 A peculiar fact which came out of this study was that even though motorcycle registrations were going up, the fatality rate remained unchanged. A plausible expla­ nation might be, as the study suggested, that a different clientele were now riding motorcycles. Rather than riders who were seeking thrills, the riders nowadays were more interested in inexpensive transportation. One other ex­ planation could be that automobile drivers were becoming more aware of motorcyclists on the roadway. With this new awareness car drivers tended to look for motorcyclists 3 0I , b i.d,. , p. 2. „ ~^Ibid. , p . 3 . 20 more. Yet another possible explanation could be that manufacturers and franchisers were assisting the customer in terms of educating them in the proper methods of hand32 ling motorcycles. One could possibly categorize factors in motor­ cycle accidents into the following: traffic law violations by drivers; actions of drivers; physical and psychological condition of the driver; mechanical condition of the vehicle; and environmental conditions. In the state of Wisconsin in 1965, 25.9 per cent of the motorcycle acci­ dents were due to speeding. Listed in the category of "other" and "not specifically defined" was 59.9 per cent. The remaining 14.2 per cent were caused by failing to yield and by following too closely. 33 The state of New York in the year 1962 reported on the causes of motorcycle acci­ dents and the category of reckless driving was the largest containing 36 per cent of the total. Two of the remaining categories were failure to yield and "other" having 2 0 and 19 per cent respectively. 34 The accident report data from these two states contained very few of the factors pre­ viously mentioned that cause and contribute to motorcycle 3 3Wisconsin Motor Vehicle Department, "Summary— Motorcycle Safety Conference" (unpublished report of con­ ference, Madison, February 15, 1966), p. 1. (Mimeographed.) 34 Department of Motor Vehicles, Motorcycle Acci­ dents in New York State in 1962 (Albany: Department of Motor Vehicles, 1963), p. 5T 21 accidents. The factors involved in motorcycle accidents obviously varied in the two states or there were incon­ sistencies in the accident reporting. More than likely both of the above situations occurred in many instances. There were no pertinent data found which would reveal the condition of motorcycles that were involved in accidents. Data did reveal, however, that motorcycles were involved in accidents the same day and hour as any other motor vehicle. Motorcycle accidents were most 35 likely to occur on a clear dry day. The Young Male Inferences can be made regarding the age and the riding experience of motorcycle operators. Those motor­ cycle operators who had less than six months riding experi­ ence were reported to have almost twice as many accidents as those operators who had more than six months riding experience.36 A motorcycle accident study in California in 1968 by Karano and Peck found that the role of age and experi­ ence and traffic convictions seemed to be the most 35 National Safety Council, Accident F a c t s , p. 56. O'Mara, "Motorcycle Accidents," p. 6 ; Ontario Department of Transport, Motorcycle Accidents in T o r o n t o , An Analysis (Toronto: Department of Transport, 1965) , p. 16. 22 important finding of the study. 37 The regression and chi- square analyses suggested that lack of skill and inexperi­ ence were more important in motorcycle accidents than in accidents involving other vehicles. 3 8 The data also re­ vealed that a person who can drive a car safely may not 39 always be able to operate a motorcycle safely. A motorcycle accident study conducted in Toronto, Ontario, found that the operators who had new model motor­ cycles were involved in accidents almost twice the rate of motorcyclists with old model motorcycles. 4 0 The study also found that more than one-half of the operators of new motorcycles had not qualified for a regular operator's license. 41 In Wisconsin a study reported nearly one-half of the motorcyclists who were killed had borrowed or rented the m o t o r c y c l e . ^ 37 Richard M. Harano and Raymond C. Peck, The California Motorcycle Study: Driver and Accident Charac­ teristics {California: California State Department of Motor Vehicles, Division of Administration, July, 1968) , p . 22. 38Ibid. 39Ibid. 4 0Ontario Department of Transport, Motorcycle Accidents in Toronto, p. 7. <^1 Ibid. , p. 1 0 . ^ U n i v e r s a l Underwriters Insurance Com a p n y , "Facts on Cycle Safety," p. 3. 23 Licensing procedures for motorcycle operators varied greatly from state to state and in the Canadian provinces. 4 3 This fact was determined by an opinion sur­ vey conducted by the American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators. Some states required special motorcycle endorsements whereas others required special testing pro­ cedures . In Oregon, a person must take his regular driver's license examination for a four-wheeled vehicle and then he must complete an exam for the motorcycle endorsement. Persons in Maine sixteen years of age or older who have valid operator's license can apply for a permit to operate two-wheeled vehicles and must appear for a road test within one year. Hawaii, New York, and Vermont all required special examinations and special licenses for motorcycle operators. Also, in New York a person must not only supply a motorcycle, but in addition, the appli­ cant must provide a passenger car and a licensed driver to transport the examiner for the road test. In Manitoba, legislation is being considered that would provide for a thirty-day instruction permit for motorcycle operators including a special license. British Columbia presently requires a special examination and a 4 3 "Motorcycling Licensing Procedures Vary Opinion Survey Reveals," AAMVA Bulletin (June, 1966), 4. 24 special license. The motorcyclist is also required to 44 wear a safety helmet. Motorcycle accident patients in two Minneapolis, Minnesota hospitals reported 70 per cent of them had rented or borrowed the motorcycle and that 2 0 per cent of them were taking their first or second ride. The role of inexperience in motorcycle crashes was investigated by Barry at the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center in 197 0. The crashes involving motorcycle owners were compared with crashes involving borrowers. 45 The sample for this study consisted of 1,230 reported motorcycle crashes and 22.8 per cent of the crashes involved borrowed motorcycles. In two-vehicle crashes borrowers were found to be going slower than owners, and borrowers were cited with a vio46 lation more often than were owners of motorcycles. Barry's study found that borrowers in single­ vehicle crashes were more frequently reported to have crashed while attempting to negotiate a turn than were 47 owners. The borrowers' crashes were not significantly different from owners' crashes with respect to severity. 44 I b i d ., p. 4. 4 5Patricia Z. Barry, The Role of Inexperience . in Motorcycle Crashes (Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center, April, 1970), p. 1. ^ I b i d . , p. 25 . 25 Also there were no differences found between the groups regarding road or weather conditions or accident locations. 48 Motorcycle lending seemed to be more pre­ valent among the younger motorcycle operators. The lack of knowledge and/or skill may account for the borrowers' higher frequency of driver error compared with owners. The borrowers of motorcycles in two-vehicle crashes at night made up 33 per cent, while the owners made up only 21 per cent. This would tend to suggest that the complex situation at night exceeded the capability of the inexperienced operator. 49 The results of this study suggested that inexperience greatly increased the hazard of motorcycle riding. 50 Australian Foldvary investigated nearly one thou­ sand motorcycle accidents involving another motor vehicle and compared several variables: blame or guilt as deter­ mined by police; age; experience with the vehicle; and the type of operator (automobile or motorcycle). Fold­ vary *s conclusions were that the only variables that were independently statistically significant were age and the experience of the operator. Blame or guilt was neither a significant variable within itself nor in any combi­ nation of other variables. Foldvary also showed that the interaction of experience, age, and the type of operator ^^Ibid. ^ I b i d . , p. 26. ~*^Ibid. 26 were statistically significant. Whether motorcyclist or motorists, if the operator was young and inexperienced, 51 he was likely to be involved in motorcycle accidents. Klein stated that disproportionate accident experience occurs in Europe at higher age levels than in the United States, but that the average licensing age in each case 52 brings about the motor vehicle accident problem. In a study conducted at the University of North Carolina by Waller et a l ., students attending the uni­ versity who owned either motorcycles or automobiles were compared. Some of the findings indicated that motorcycle operators were less likely to be in graduate or pro­ fessional school, less likely to be married, and more likely to be from out of state than were automobile owners. 53 When grades were compared, there were no differ­ ences between the motorcycle and automobile owners. But when grades were compared with driving records, both automobile and motorcycle students showed significant 51 J. N. Hanks and L. A. Foldvary, "Analysis of Age and Experience of Drivers Involved in Accidents," Australian Road Research, II, No. 4 (1965) , 60. 52 David Klein, "A Reappraisal of the Violatxon and Accident Data on Teen-Aged Drivers," Traffic Quarterly, XX (October, 1966), 508. 53 Patricia F. Waller, D. W. Reinfurt, C. B. Reifler, and G. G. Koch, Motorcycles versus Automobiles: How Their Owners Differ (Chapel H i l l : University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center, June, 1969), p. 25. 27 relationships. Students with the poorer driving records also tended to have poorer grades. It was the feeling of the researchers that the poorer grades and driving records could result from greater exposure; that is, the more time spent driving the vehicle the more likely a person would be involved in an accident or receive a traffic citation and the less time for studying. 54 Biesheuvel and Barnes, in a study of motorcycle accidents conducted in South Africa, reported that with the exception of speeding, motorcyclists' faults in acci­ dents had no consistent bearing upon age by motorcyclists under thirty-five years of age. Biesheuvel and Barnes also stated that they believed the higher involvement of young motorcycle operators was a degree of intensity of those faults found in the older motorcycle o p e r a t o r s . ^ They found motorists most likely to make poor right turns (like a left turn in the United States) without regard for caution. They also observed that carelessness, in­ attention, and the refusal of courtesies on the road were prominent factors in motorcycle ac c i d e n t s . ^ 55 S. Biesheuvel and P. M. Barnes, "A Study of Motorcycle Accidents— An Analysis of Their Incidence and of the Factors that Influence Their Occurrence," South Africa Journal of Science (January, 1958), 3. ^ I b i d . , p. 12. 28 The University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center conducted a study of 36 6 motorcycle accidents in North Carolina during the first half of 19 66.57 It was found that many of the accidents occurred because the car driver and the motorcycle operator were both un­ familiar with the intricacies of a blend of these vehicles on the highway. In a greater number of cases, when a car and a motorcycle crashed, the car driver was held to be in violation of the law if a citation was issued. other studies also found this to be the case. Several The increas ing number of accidents, injuries, and deaths of motor­ cycle operators calls for intensive action to counter this problem. A number of possible actions could be taken to try to correct this situation. For example, crash helmets and a special license for motorcycle operators should be required and public information programs directed at fourwheeled vehicle owners who too often fail to look for and 58 see motorcycles on our roadways should be developed. 57 Motorcycle Accidents in North Carolina (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Highway Safety Re­ search Center, February, 1967), pp. 1-5. 58Ibid. 29 Personality Factors Jeffcoate and Garwood found that no data existed to separate the effects of youthfulness and inexperience in motorcycle accidents in 1956. 59 Young people may use the automobile as an equalizer, Klein stated, when unfulfilled needs exist with respect to athletic prowess, recognition by adults, and grades. Klein also stated that frustrations may lead to aggressive be­ havior in automobile usage.®® Turfboer believed that driving a motor vehicle is a social activity in which personality and social attitudes may be expressed; however, he believed that many act out inner conflicts as they drive dangerously, but this is not associated with their normal pattern of living. Turfboer also stated that people need to get their problems out in the open rather than keep them pent up inside where they would more than likely explode. Persons should also be able to recognize the feelings that would likely result in dangerous driving behavior. 61 5 9G. O. Jeffcoate Information on Motorcycle to Age of Motorcyclists” search Laboratory, 1956), and F. Garwood, "A Review of Accidents with Special Reference (Crowthorne, England: Road Re­ p. 5. (Mimeographed.) ®®Klein, "Violation and Accident Data on TeenAged Drivers," p. 509. Robert Turfboer, "Do People Really Drive as They Live?," Traffic Quarterly, XXI (January, 1967), 101, 103, 105, 108. 30 Samuel Durbin reported on what an automobile means to a driver: "To the adolescent it may mean freedom and escape, both real and symbolic, from parental control and supervision." Durbin stated further: The automobile for many people is a symbol of sex, speed, wealth, and power and convenience. And the act of driving . . . is an act of expression of psychological and emotional needs. . . . The auto­ mobile makes it possible for persons to express hostility, discourtesy, and emotional conflict often without fear of r e p r i s a l . 62 Klein noted that when parental reluctance existed prior to a youngster's purchase of a motorcycle, psycho­ logical problems frequently took place following his acci­ dent involvement,^ Deutsch found that lower class children had higher accident rates, but their environment also appeared to be more hazardous. A fatalistic attitude predominated among their class and more independence was granted them by 64 parents, mainly through neglect. Even though over­ controlled and overprotected, children may live a restructed life with respect to exposure to h a z a r d s . ^ 62 Samuel S. Durbin, "Emotions and Traffic Acci­ dents— A Psychologist Looks at the Problem of Highway Safety," Traffic Safety Research Review, V (June, 1961), 7, 8 . 63O'Mara, "Motorcycle Accidents," p. 8 . 6 4Herbert H. Jacobs et a l ., Behavioral Approaches to Accident Research (New York: Association for the Aid to Crippled Children, 1961), p. 95. ^^Ibid. , p. 100. 31 Klein stated that socially useful risk-taking is rewarded in Western cultures and as youths mat u r e , they replace youthful risk-taking endeavors of a physical nature with responsibilities in the adult world that provide sufficient sources for gratification. But for teenagers who have few sources of worthwhile gratification, there is continuing involvement " . . . in a high level of socially dysfunctional risk-taking in order to gain the peer-group admiration which it can elicit."*’® In talking about accidents in general, Fox divided the population engaging in any specific hazardous activity into four groups: hazard, (1) those who did not think of any (2) those who equate uncertainity of any hazard with zero risk, (3) those who believe there is no hazard, and (4) those who deliberately appraise the hazard. In 67 all four groups Fox noted a belief of invulnerability. A survey of the attitudes of motorcyclists who had been involved in an accident showed that they had a lower sense of social responsibility than the non-accident subjects. Those in the group that were involved in acci­ dents had unfavorable attitudes toward safety measures and traffic control and had poor attitudes toward other ®®Klein, "Violation and Accident Data on TeenAged Drivers," pp. 509, 510. fi7 Jacobs e t a l ., Accident Research, pp. 52-53. 32 road users upon which they tended to project their own lack of discipline. Biesheuvel and Barnes concluded, "In brief, character defect, particularly in respect of social consciousness, is at the root of the motorcycle accident 68 problem." At the beginning of their study, they had said that if accidents may be traced to human nature, and if it is not readily changed, then a fatalistic attitude toward accidents is propagated. Biesheuvel and Barnes also stated, "There is a general belief that youthful exuberance, irresponsibility, and love of speed of motor69 cyclists are the principal causes." To show that a more favorable motorcycle accident experience can be obtained, a statistic released by the Los Angeles Police Department in 1966, proved that police on motorcycles had an accident rate of 17.9 per 100,000,000 miles traveled, while the patrol car accident rate was 70 27.9 per 100,000,000 miles for the same year. At the conclusion of a 19 65 motorcycle accident study in Canada, Brezina stated: Because it has not been possible to discover any strong action characteristic possessed by the high-rate group, there is no specific behavioural 68 Biesheuvel and Barnes, "A Study of Motorcycle Accidents," p. 14. ^ Ibid. , p. 4. Westways ^°Paul Dietzel, "Can Motorcycling Be Safe?," (December, 1966), reprint. 33 problem to attack. Any improvement in accident experience must result from a general improvement in the driving attitude of this group of motor­ cyclists .71 £ae Soaring accident rates in the late 19 50's of motorscooters brought about a public outcry for something to be done to curb the accident rate. Some states, as a result of rising accident rates, enacted licensing laws which would permit fourteen- and fifteen-year-olds to operate two-wheeled motor vehicles under five horsepower. Many officials even demanded that motorscooters be cora72 pletely banned. In South Africa, Biesheuvel and Barnes found very little public interest involving the four hundred youths under twenty years of age that were killed in motor vehicle accidents in 1947. But there were 100 polio victims that 73 same year and the people became outraged over that. The state of Washington discovered the median age for deaths from motorcycle accidents was twenty-two years, but for all other motor vehicles it was thirty-three years 71 Ontario Department of Transport, Motorcycle Accidents in Toronto, p. 15. ^2"Too Young to Scoot?," Newsweek (August 25, 1958) p. 18. 73 Biesheuvel and Barnes, "A Study of Motorcycle Accidents," p. 3. 34 of age. New York reported in 1962 that 34 per cent of all motor vehicle accidents occurred to drivers aged twentynine and under. But this age group accounted for 52 per cent of the total number of motorcycle accidents. In 196 6 in Los Angeles County, 4 2 per cent of the motorcycle acci­ dent victims were teenagers while 76 per cent of the motor­ cycle accident victims were under twenty-six years of age. 7 4 A study conducted in Kansas in 1966 noted that persons between the ages of sixteen and twenty-four years of age accounted for approximately 60 per cent of the motorcycle accidents.^ Klein argued that since time and mileage exposures are not accurately known in most motor vehicle accidents, age may not be as important a criterion 76 as it often appears. Motorcycle Size and Accident Involvement In a study conducted in England, Munden noted that large motorcycles were involved in more severe acci­ dents than small motorcycles. A major finding of Munden1s 74 Alfred Crancer, Motorcycle Fatality Study, 1965 and 1966 Data (Olympia: Washington Department of Motor Vehicles, 1967), p. 2; Los Angeles County, "Survey on Motorcycles," p. 4; "Two-Wheeled Trouble," Journal of American Insurance, XL (September, 1964), 23. 7 5State Highway Commission, Summary of Motor Vehicle Accidents Involving Motorcycles, 1966 (Topeka, Kansas: State Highway Commission, 1967), p. 3. 76 Klein, "Violation and Accident Data on TeenAged Drivers," p. 504. 35 study was that operators under twenty-five years of age with motorcycles over 350 cc were involved in 2 0 per cent of the fatal and serious accidents but made up only 5 per cent of the registrations. 77 Munden did not determine if his figures were a result of motorcycle size alone. Visibility of Motorcycles No studies were found that compared or involved the color of motorcycles, but in Sweden a study determined that black automobiles were involved in 22.2 per cent of the accidents though their registrations made up only 4.4 per cent of the registered automobiles. Pink cars made up 6.2 per cent of the registered vehicles and were involved in only 2.4 per cent of the accidents. This study also found that people are inclined to overestimate the distance from a dark car and underestimate the distance of a pink car. Black cars seemed to move slower than they actually were and pink cars seemingly moved faster than they 78 actually were moving. O'Hara pointed out that motorcycles have a small profile and are, therefore, difficult for drivers to see 7 7J. M. Munden, "The Variation of Motorcycle Acci­ dent Rates with Age of Riders and Size of Machine," Inter­ national Road Safety and Traffic Review, XII (Winter, 1964), TT. 7 8George Embree, "Color of Car Might Influence Crash Rate," Detroit Free Press (Michigan), September 18, 1964. 36 and added, " . . . the ordinary driver's vision and mind are not trained or disciplined to watch for and recognize a cycle, its speed, or distance away." 79 Severity of Motorcycle Accidents A study in England revealed that a motorcycle was no more likely to become involved in an accident, on a registration basis, than an automobile. However, on a mileage basis, a motorcycle was twice as likely to be in­ volved in an accident as an automobile based on data ob­ tained from 1948 through 1952. If a person were to plan a trip by motorcycle, he could expect to be injured at a rate twenty times as great as an automobile. He would also be forty times as likely to be killed on a motorcycle as he would be in an automobile. 8 0 Pike made a study of 579 motorcycle accidents in81 volving army personnel in England in 1949. He found that head injuries accounted for most of the deaths and for 25 per cent of the serious injuries, but that they accounted for only a small portion of the "slightly 7 9M u n r o , "Deadliest Vehemence," pp. 23, 24. OA G. O. Jeffcoate, Relative Accident Rates for Different Types of Vehicles~*Involved in Pedestrian Acci­ dents in Built-up Areas on Week Days (Crawthorne, England: Road Research Laboratory, J u T y , 19 57), p. 2. 81 Major D. F. Bayly Pike, Accidents Resulting in Injuries to Army Motorcycles (London: Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1949), p. 14. 37 injured" cases. Consequently, he stated, the mandatory use of crash helmets probably saved many lives. Pike also found that injuries to the legs were the most common features of the accidents. Injuries to the legs were found to be twice as frequent as injuries to the upper limbs. 8 2 One interesting discovery Pike made was that injuries occurred much more frequently to the right side p *3 of the body than to the left side. As can be seen in Table 2, Pike, in his motorcycle accident study, came up with a number of causative factors that occur in motorcycle accidents. Motorcycles, by their very nature, are small and could possibly be compared to small automobiles by stretch ing the imagination somewhat. But then a motorcycle is much less stable than a small automobile. A study in California found that small cars were involved in acci­ dents at almost twice the rate as were larger cars. Re­ search was done in Maine that revealed when small cars were involved in collisions with large cars, the ratio of persons killed was 5.5:1.8^ 82Ibid., p. 15. 83Ibid., p. 14. 84 Universal Underwriters Insurance Company, "Facts on Cycle Safety," p. 2. TABLE 2.— Frequency with which certain causative factors occur in motorcycle accidents.a Frequency of Factor In: Factor Fatal Accidents Serious Accidents Slight Accidents Total Frequency (%) Excessive Speed 3 31 53 87 15.0 Bad Road Surface: Temporary Permanent 0 0 13 6 43 20 56 26 9.7 4.5 Inexperience 3 23 51 77 13.3 Improper Passing 3 15 47 65 11.2 Vision Obstruction 1 16 32 49 8.5 Mechanical Defect 1 9 33 43 7.4 Animal in Road 0 5 13 18 3.1 16 167 396 579 Number of Accidents ^ a j or D. F, Bayly Pike, Accidents Resulting in Injuries to Army Motorcyclists (London: Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1949), p. 13. 39 A study of motorcycle accidents in the Ottawa 85 area was done by Campbell et a l . in 1967. From the sample of 363 accidents, 229 persons were killed or in­ jured, and of the injured 71.7 per cent were hospitalized. The motorcycle accidents in the Ottawa area were subject to seasonal influences and the eighteen-year-old male pC operator was predominantly involved. The motorcycle operators were relatively inexperienced and pedestrians and other vehicle operators were to blame in many of the motorcycle accidents. The risk of injury or death appeared to be higher in the Ottawa area than in Canada as a whole. Throughout Canada the risk of death is 40 per cent greater on a motorcycle than it is with other vehicles, and the risk of injury appears to be 120 per cent greater than in all other motor vehicles. 87 Even though deaths have been noted in motorcycle accidents, it appears that personal injuries are a very common occurrence. Of the motorcycle accidents reported it appears that personal injuries occur in 75 per cent to 9 5 per cent of the accidents. It should be noted that the lack of protection is one of the most significant factors in motorcycle accident injuries. A Massachusetts study 85 E. O. Campbell, M. E. Macbeth, and S. W. Ryan, Motorcycle Accidents Ottawa Area 1967 {Ottawa: Traffic Injury Research Foundation of Canada, 1967), p. 7. 86t^ ., Ibid. 87t. .. Ibid. 40 in 19 53 found that the collision of two motor vehicles costs $381, an automobile with a fixed object costs $414, and an automobile with a pedestrian was $572. 8 8 Insurance companies have long noted the severity of motorcycle acci89 dents. Head injuries have frequently caused death to motorcycle riders, and, as a result, many states have passed laws requiring persons on motorcycles to wear hel­ mets. Up to three-fourths of the persons killed riding motorcycles had severe head injuries. Ellison reported that helmet use in Australia and England reduced the number of deaths by 25 per cent to 50 per cent. 9 0 But even when helmets are worn, this does nothing to remedy the problem of mangled arms and legs that all too often occur in a motorcycle accident. Motorcycles are involved in collisions with other vehicles at a very high rate according to state summaries 91 of motorcycle accidents. 88 "The Economic Costs of Motor Vehicle Accidents of Different Types," Public Roads, XXX (June, 1958), 42. o g "Meeting the Motorcycle Menace," p. 23. 9 0Ellison, The Motorcycle Problem, p. 23. 91 Department of Motor Vehicles, Accident F a c t s , p. 18; Department of Public Works and Buildings, The Motorcycle in Traffic Accidents, Illinois 19 66 (Springfrieid., Illinois: Department o£ PuBTic Works and Buildings, 1967), p. 20; Los Angeles County, "Survey on Motorcycles," p. 2; Michigan State Police, Michigan Motorcycle and Motor Scooter Data, 1962-1966 (East Lansing: Michigan State Police^ l£f>^) , p. £; Washington State Police, Summary of Motorcycle Accidents 1 9 6 5 , p. 1. 41 During the years 1962-19 66 motorcycle registrations in the state of Michigan increased 179 per cent but fatali­ ties from motorcycle accidents increased 2 47 per cent during this same period of time. 92 Ingham County's motor­ cycle accident experience for 1970 was 191 but in 1971, it had climbed to 323. This represented a 69 per cent in­ crease in accidents during the one year period. Yet/ during this one year period, there was only one fatality reported as a result of a motorcycle accident. Munro re­ ported that Canada had a 4 5 per cent increase in regis­ trations of motorcycles and an 81.4 per cent increase in 93 fatal accidents involving motorcycles in the year 1966. The registration of motorcycles and the number of motor­ cycle accidents have increased at about the same rate, but many jurisdictions have had a more rapid rise in fatal motorcycle accidents than in registration of motorcycles. 94 Motorcycles on the average do not travel as many miles as do automobiles. It looks as though motorcycles are involved in approximately 50 per cent less accidents on a registration basis than automobiles. 9 5 But when 92 Michigan State Police, Motorcycle and Motor Scooter D a t a , p. 1. 9 3Munro, "Deadliest Vehemence," p. 1. 94 National Safety Council, Accident F a c t s , p. 56. 9 5Department of Motor Vehicles, A Review of Motor­ cycle Problems in New York State (Albany: Department of Motor Vehicles , 1966} , p"I T~. 42 fatal accidents are considered, motorcycles do not com­ pare favorably with automobiles on a registration basis. For example, in the state of New York in 19 62, there were 19.0 deaths per 10,000 registered motorcycles as compared to 4.3 deaths for the same number of registered automoQg biles. In Mississippi during the year 1965 10.0 deaths occurred per 10,000 registered motorcycles while only 6.2 deaths occurred for automobiles. 97 For the entire natron in the year 1962 there were 13.0 deaths per 10,000 regis­ tered motorcycles while there were only 5.1 deaths per 10.00 0 registered automobiles. 9 8 Solutions to the Problem The chairman of the Trauma Committee of the Academy of Medicine of Cleveland, Dr. Robert Walz said: It is often implied that motorbikes are so dangerous that no one should ride them. This attitude is not only unrealistic, but will be totally unsuccessful in providing any solutions to the problem. It is essential to face the fact that riding a motorbike on a summer day is an exciting, exhilarating experi­ ence. It is unquestionably great fun, it is here to stay, and will undoubtedly increase in popularity.99 96Ibid. , p. 1 . 97 Dana B. Brammer, A Look at the Motorcycle Prob­ lem, Public Administration Survey, School of Business and Government, Vol. XIV (University: University of Mississippi, January, 1967), p. 2. " " T w o-Wheeled Trouble," p. 22. 9 9Universal Underwriters Insurance Company, on Cycle Safety," p. 2. "Facts 43 In Illinois a study reported that in fatal motor­ cycle accidents no single corrective action could be found to apply to the accidents.^® Ditzel, in Canada, pointed out that with rising registrations and accidents of motor­ cycles, the state should take action to protect its young , 101 people. Many official agencies and groups of individuals have called for some corrective action on the motorcycle accident problem. following measures: They have suggested some or all of the driver education for motorcyclists; face protection; inspection of the motorcycle; protective headgear; safety equipment on the motorcycle; and special licenses for motorcycle operators. 102 Francis S. Lorenz, "Fatal Motorcycle Accidents" (unpublished report delivered to the Governor's Official Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee, Springfield, Illi­ nois, November 16, 1966), p. 2. 101 Ditzel, "Can Motorcycling Be Safe?" 102 "Air Force Holds Seminar on Two-Wheeler Acci­ dents," Traffic Safety, LXVII (February, 1967) , 19; Biesheuvel and Barnes, "A Study of Motorcycle Accidents," p. 16; Walter E. Davidson, "What Motorcycle-Motorscooter Industry is Doing to Promote Safe Operation," Traffic Digest and Review, XV (January, 1967) , 14-16; Leroy Dunn, "Teach Them How to Ride," Safety, III (March-April, 1967), 17; Beth Majid, "Danger Rides Two Wheels," Parents Maga­ zine , XXXVIII (Sepgember, 1963), 684; U.S. Department of Commerce, Dfaft Highway Safety Program Standard No. 4.4.3 — Motorcycle Safety (Washington, D.C. : National Highway Safety Bureau, February, 1967), p. 2; U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, "Exploratory Meeting on Motorcycle Safety Education" (Washington, 1966), pp. 5-8. (Mimeographed.) 44 "We are fed up with trying to patch up the bodies of young kids unnecessarily injured . . . " stated Dr. Robert H. Kennedy, a member of the American College of Surgeons. Dr. Kennedy recommended an extensive attack on the motorcycle accident problem. He also recommended that medical seminars be set up for doctors, nurses, and ambu­ lance attendants for the purpose of treating motorcycle ^• 103 accident victims. In Great Britain Smeed pointed out that he believed motor vehicle injuries would be reduced by 34 per cent if all motorcycles were replaced by four-wheeled vehicles. He also stated that he did not believe that the idea would be very well received in Great Britain.'*'®4 Summary The review of literature shows that many things have been written about the various aspects of motorcycle accidents. State police agencies have accumulated tre­ mendous amounts of motorcycle accident data, but most research into motorcycle accident data up until the mid1960's was done in foreign countries. The in-depth study of motorcycle accidents was found to be sparse. Only one 103 "Safety Group Demands Safer Conditions for Motorcycle Use," Medical Tribune and Medical N e w s , VII (November 30, 1966), 1. 1 04 R. J. Smeed, "Methods Available to Reduce the Numbers of Road Casualities," International Road Safety and Traffic Review, XIII (Autumn, 1964) , 10. 45 study in the United States followed the in-depth approach, that being a case study analysis of motorcycle accidents in three Illinois counties. The increase in the popularity of motorcycles began about 1963 and has risen steadily since that time. There are approximately 3,293,4 00 registered motorcycles in the United States at the present time. Foreign manu­ facturers of motorcycles have made it easier for many more people to own and operate motorcycles because of the de­ creased cost. Motorcycle accident increases have kept pace with increased motorcycle registrations, but the death rate from motorcycle accidents has increased at a more rapid pace than has motorcycle registrations. Motor­ cycle accident rates compare favorably with the rates of four-wheeled vehicles using the registrations as the basis for comparison. However, when mileage traveled is used as the basis for comparison, motorcycles compared unfavorably with four-wheeled vehicles. Studies of motorcycle acci­ dents have shown that wearing safety helmets have reduced deaths and accident severity, especially head injuries. Therefore, many states now are requiring their use when operating a motorcycle. Several motorcycle accident studies have shown that there are combinations of causal factors that lead up to a motorcycle accident. If a motorist were involved in an accident with a motorcyclist, the motorist was most 46 often found to be at fault. The two leading causal factors between motorist and motorcycle were the motorist turning left in front of and pulling into the path of an oncoming motorcycle. Many studies pointed out that motorcyclists, who were inexperienced, were involved in almost twice as many accidents as the more experienced motorcycle rider. Also, most studies that were found pointed out that the young male motorcyclist had the greatest accident involvement. There were little applicable data available that pointed out effects of youthfulness and inexperience. One study pointed out that generally there were no differences between youth that rode motorcycles and those that did not. Another study revealed that persons involved in motorcycle accidents had less social con­ sciousness about them than persons who were not involved in motorcycle accidents. This study also concluded that youthful exuberance and no sense of responsibility were the major causes of motorcycle accidents. The researchers further stated that motorcyclists would have to change their driving attitudes in order to reduce motorcycle accidents. Another study reported the motorcyclist who borrowed a motorcycle was much more likely to have an accident than a person riding his own motorcycle. One report stated that young people use automobiles to satisfy unmet needs and desires, however, there was no data found supporting this in relation to motorcycles. Some studies 47 did report that the "love of speed" was a causal factor in some motorcycle accidents. Many people who had worked with motorcycle data believed that accident reports contained insufficient data to be of much value when studying motorcycle acci­ dents . There were a number of suggestions and recommen­ dations to help remedy the motorcycle accident problem. Some suggested that the following be required: operator's licenses; inspection; (2) protective riding gear; (1) special (3) vehicle (4) driver education for motorcyclists; and (5) a ban on motorcycles from the highways. One study suggested that major design changes be made on motorcycles so they will be safer, but that would eliminate the unique quality that many people are looking for when purchasing a motorcycle. Another publication pointed out the wide range of licensing laws for motorcyclists among the various states. Many safety groups made suggestions that studies be made to determine the major causes of motorcycle acci­ dents and then take appropriate measures to correct them so the growing problem of motorcycle accidents will be reduced. A review of related literature was presented in this chapter. Chapter III will contain the design and methodology of this study. C H A P T E R III DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY The review of literature was presented in the preceding chapter. In this chapter the design and method­ ology of the study is presented. Included are the research questions to be answered, sample selection, development of the instrument, procedure for collecting the data, treat­ ment of the data, and summary. Research Questions to be Answered The primary objective of the study was to collect and analyze data which would indicate the strength of re­ lationship between seventeen different variables and the severity of the accident, using medical costs as the index of severity. The variables of concern in this study were as follows: 1. Sex 2. Age 3. Educational Level 4. Motorcycle Riding Experience 5. Time of the Accident 6. Type of Roadway 48 49 7. Type of Surface of Roadway 8. Highway Condition 9. Weather Condition 10. Alcohol 11. Drugs 12. Alcohol and Drugs 13. Hours of Motorcycle Riding Instruction 14. Wearing a Helmet 15. Wearing Goggles or Face Shield 16. Wearing Boots 17. Wearing Protective Clothing The secondary purpose of the study was to seek out and show possible causal factors related to motorcycle accidents. Sample Selection In preparation for drawing the s a m p l e , each law enforcement agency that investigated a motorcycle accident to be used in the study was personally contacted. The pur­ pose of this was to get permission from the agency for the Michigan State Police to release the accident reports. A list of the participating agencies may be found in Appen­ dix A. The accident reports were obtained from the Safety and Traffic Division of the Michigan State Police located in the Frandor Shopping Center in Lansing. The accident reports were made available to obtain the names and addresses of persons involved in motorcycle accidents in 50 Ingham County in 1971 so that personal contacts could be made. The researcher found that there were 323 motor­ cycle accidents in Ingham County in 1971. The copies of the motorcycle accident reports were numbered consecutively from 1 to 323. A table of random numbers was employed to designate those persons to be interviewed. 10 5 The random number that corresponded with the assigned number of the accident report of the motorcyclist was determined to be the interviewee. By consulting persons qualified in statistical research, it was determined that a sample of 100 out of the total population of 323 would be representative. It was resolved that the data obtained from this sample size would provide reliable information for the study. A systematic probability sample of 130 persons who were in­ volved in motorcycle accidents in Ingham County in 1971 was drawn so that each person had an equal chance of being selected. The additional accidents were chosen in the event that the persons involved in the originally selected accidents either did not wish to be interviewed, were from outside the state of Michigan, had moved away, or after three attempts to contact him failed. A total of 109 of the original 130 selections were used as seven persons could not be contacted, one did not wish to be interviewed, 105 Wilfrid J. Dixon and Frank J. Massey, J r . , Introduction to Statistical Analysis (2nd e d . ; New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 19 57), pp. 366-70. 51 and one was deceased, but not as the result of the motor­ cycle accident. A total of 100 persons were interviewed for this research. Development of the Instrument A personal interview technique was employed as the methodology for gathering the data because of the higher validity associated with this method as compared to other methods. Further, it was possible to know when the re­ spondent did not understand a question and did, within limits, allow for a repeating or rephrasing of the ques­ tion. Most important, the interview permitted probing into the context of, and reasons for, answers to the four open-ended questions presented in the interview question­ naire . An interview questionnaire was developed by the researcher. instrument: Four major areas were included in the (1) the motorcycle operator, in which the motorcycle was ridden, rider with motorcycles, and (2 ) environment (3) experience of the (4) educational needs of the operator as it related to motorcycle operation. The personal interview questionnaire appears in Appendix B. Duane R. Johnson, "A Case Study of Motorcycle Accidents in Three Illinois Counties" (unpublished Ed.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1968), Appendices. 52 Procedure for Collecting the Data The names and addresses of the persons who were involved in motorcycle accidents in Ingham County, Michi­ gan, in 1971 were obtained. The per s o n s , who had been randomly selected for inclusion in this study, were written a letter of intro­ duction by this researcher. They were informed that they would be contacted by telephone to set up an interview data that would be mutually convenient for them and the interviewer. A copy of this letter may be found in Appen­ dix C. The interviewees were told that the information they volunteered would be held in strictest confidence and would be used for educational purposes only. The data gathered from the interviewees would be used as group data — not singled out individually. The researcher informed the interviewees that the interview was entirely volun­ tary. Three attempts were made to interview the origi­ nally designated persons before contacting an alternate respondent from the randomly chosen group. The Pearson Product Moment Correlation (r) was used to determine the strength of relationships among items one through seventeen identified in the section on Research Questions to be Answered. A table was developed to illustrate the strength of the relationship existing. 53 Treatment of the Data Frequency distributions and or percentages were developed from the possible causal factors of the motor­ cycle accidents. Frequency distributions and or percentages were developed for the following: 1. Sex of the operator 2. Age of the operator 3. Education of the operator 4. Occupation of the operator 5. Month the accident occurred 6 . Day of the month the accident 7. of the week the accident occurred Day occurred 8 . Medical costs of the accident 9. Motorcycle riding experience 10. Hours of riding per week of motorcyclist 11. Does the motorcyclist ride everyday 12. Time of the day the motorcyclist 13= Time of the accident 14. Purpose of the motorcycle 15. Day of the week when riding most likely occurs 16. Length of time riding when the accident occurred 17. Kind of locality where the accident occurred 18. Motorcyclist generally riding 19. First time in the area where the 20. Occurrences of riding on the road where the acci­ dent occurred generally rides in his home county accident occurred 54 21. Type of roadway 22. Type of road surface 23. Highway condition 24. Vertical contour of the roadway 25. Horizontal contour of the roadway 26. Light conditions 27. Weather conditions 28. Condition of the road surface 29. Riding with head light on 30. Reduced visibility at the time of the 31. Lack of signs where the accident occurred accident 32. Distractions at the time the accident occurred 33. Action taken to reduce the severity of the accident 34. Motorcyclist upset or worried just prior to the accident 35. Trip origination 36. Trip destination 37. Riding differently after the accident 38. Anything mechanically wrong with the motorcycle 39. Drinking prior to the accident 40. Type of alcohol consumed 41. Use of drugs prior to the accident 42. What drugs were taken 43. Use of alcohol and drugs prior to the 44. Number of hours of motorcycle riding instruction 45. Type of motorcycle riding instruction 46. Type of motorcycle riding instructor accident 55 47. Completion of driver education program 48. Number of hours of motorcycle instruction in a driver education program 49. Familiarity with the motorcycle regulation in Michigan 50. Did the motorcyclist have insurance 51. Was the motorcyclist wearing a helmet 52. Was the motorcyclist shield wearing goggles or a face 53. Was the motorcyclist wearing boots 54. Was the motorcyclist wearing protective clothing 55. Motorcyclist took a special operator's examination 56. Motorcycle owned by the interviewee 57. Was the motorcyclist charged with a violation in connection with the accident 58. The violation the motorcyclist was charged with 59. Thoughts of the motorcyclist just before the accident occurred 60. Advice of motorcyclist to prevent the accident 61. Causes of the accident— as stated by the inter­ viewee To give further insight into the data, at least one accident in each category was treated as a case study. Each case study will, hopefully, give more insight into the causal factors of the accident. For the purpose of determining the number of case studies, the motorcycle accidents were grouped in accident categories. There were ten distinctive categories and 56 various numbers of accidents within each category. This information may be found in Table 3. TABLE 3.— Determining the case studies found in this research. Accident Categories 1. Number of Accidents Number of Case Studies Car pulled in front of motorcycle 24 2 Car turned left in front of motorcycle 19 2 3. Rear-end collision 13 2 4. Motorcycle ran off the roadway 12 2 Car turned into motorcycle 8 1 Motorcycle overturn­ ing in roadway 7 2 Motorcycle hit object in roadway 6 1 Motorcycle pulled in front of car 6 1 Motorcycle hit parked car 3 1 Cycle turned into car 2 1 100 15 2. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Total Also included in the case study will be a situational diagram depicting the scene of the accident. This includes symbols, identifying persons, vehicles, and other objects that will aid in clarifying the accident scene. 57 The data were presented in each case study as follows: 1. Type of Accident 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway a. Type b. Surface c. Character d. Condition 3. Kind of Locality 4. T ime 5. Light Conditions 6. Weather Conditions 7. Traffic Conditions 8. Vehicle Information 9. a. Make, model, year b. Condition Driver Data a. Sex b. Age c. Driving experience d. Violation in connection with the accident 10. Narrative Account of the Accident 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident 58 Summary In this chapter the research questions to be answered, sample selection, method of selection, develop­ ment of the instrument, and treatment of the data were presented. In the following chapter the analysis of the data may be found. C H A P T E R IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA The design and methodology was presented in the preceding chapter. In this chapter, an analysis of the data is presented. The chapter was organized in the following manner: (1 ) data citing the intercorrelations of the study variables, (2) data relative to the possible causal factors of motorcycle accidents, and (3) the case studies. Data Citing the Intercorrelations of the Study Variables The major purpose of this study was to determine the strength of relationship between certain variables and the severity of motorcycle accidents as determined by the medical costs. Seventeen variables were compared to the medical costs of the accidents. These data were analyzed using the CDC 6 500 com­ puter at Michigan State University. cients Correlation coeffi­ (r) were computed and tested for significance, util­ izing the appropriate t-test. Fisher's test of significance 59 60 table for correlation coefficients was used to determine significance at the appropriate degree of freedom. The .05 level of significance was predetermined to be acceptable in this study. Seventeen research variables were formulated and systematically analyzed as indicated below: Variable 1: Sex Variable 2: Age Variable 3: Educational Variable 4: Motorcycle Riding Experience Level Variable 5: Time of the Accident Variable 6 : Type of Roadway Variable 7: Type of Surface of Roadway Variable 8 : Highway Condition Variable 9: Weather Condition Variable 10: Alcohol Variable 11: Drugs Variable 12: Alcohol and Drugs Variable 13: Hours of Motorcycle Riding Instruction Variable 14: Wearing a Helmet Variable 15: Wearing Goggles or Face Variable 16: Wearing Boots Variable 17: Wearing Protective Clothing Shield R. A. Fisher and F. Yates# Statistical Tables for Biological# Agricultural# and Medical Research (Edin­ burgh : Oliver and Boyd # Ltd.) # p"I 301. 61 The data in Table 4 indicates that there was no significant relationship between the severity of the accident and any of the other study variables. (Possible explanations for these findings are presented in Chapter V under "Discussion." TABLE 4.— Intercorrelations of medical costs of the acci­ dent and other study variables. Variable Sex Age Educational Level Motorcycle Riding Experience Time of the Accident Type of Roadway Type of Surface of Roadway Highway Condition Weather Condition Alcohol Drugs Alcohol and Drugs Hours of Motorcycle Riding Instruction Wearing a Helmet Wearing Goggles or Face Shield Wearing Boots Wearing Protective Clothing r Probability > > > > > > > > > > > > .05 .05 .05 .05 .05 .05 .05 .05 .05 . 05 .05 .05 -.0586 -.0210 -.1129 -.1177 .0081 .0077 -.0273 .0000 -.0462 -.0551 .0353 .0353 P P P P P P P P P P P P .0532 -.0440 P > .05 P > .05 -.0853 .0651 .1058 P > .05 P > .05 P > .05 Note: r value needed to show significance at the .05 level is .1950. 62 Data Relative to the Possible Causal Factors of Motorcycle Accidents Sex of the Persons Involved in Motorcycle Accidents Presented in Table 5 is the sex of the persons involved in the motorcycle accidents. This table reveals that 98 males and 2 females were involved. TABLE 5.— Sex of the persons involved in motorcycle accidents. Sex Number Male Female Total Percent 98 98 2 2 100 100 Age of the Persons Involved in Motorcycle Accidents Presented in Table 6 are the ages of the persons involved in the motorcycle accidents. This table indi­ cates that the ages ranged from 15 to 71 years. The 2 0-24 age group were involved in the greatest percentage of the accidents. (45%) It may also be noted that, when com­ paring the age groups, the 15-24 year olds accounted for 70 per cent of the motorcycle accidents used in this study. This fact would seem to agree with most of the studies cited in the Review of Literature. Eighty-six per cent of the involved drivers were under 3 0 years of age. mean age of the motorcycle riders was 24.01 years. The 63 T A B L E 6.— A g e of m o t o r c y c l i s t s . Age Number Percent 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-40 41-50 51-60 over 60 25 45 16 9 3 1 1 25 45 16 9 3 1 1 Total 100 100 Note: Mean age for motorcyclists is 24.01 years. Educational Level and Occupation of Motorcyclists Educational data revealed that almost half of the motorcyclists had at least a high school education. was one, however, who had a Ph.D. degree. There The educational level of the motorcyclists would tend to be above average because of the large number of students who were involved in the accidents. The mean educational level of the motorcyclists was 13.24 years. Over one-third of the motorcyclists studied were students. Of those working, the largest group was non-skilled with 24 per cent. facts are shown in Table 7. These 64 TABLE 7.- - E d u c a t i o n a l level and o c c u p a t i o n of m o t o r c y c l i s t s . Occupation Educational Level Years of Education Completed Number Percent 9 1 1 Professional* 10 1 1 Semi-pro­ fessional 11 3 3 Number Percent 10 10 7 7 Skilled worker 17 17 Non-skilled 24 24 36 36 6 6 100 100 Occupation 12 49 49 13 8 8 Student 14 9 9 Unemployed 15 16 16 16 10 10 17 2 2 20 1 1 100 100 Total *Key: Professional: Doctor, lawyer, teacher Semi-Professional: Barber, beautician, secretary, Service station owner, salesman Skilled Worker: Foreman, electrician, plumber, mechanic Non-skilled Worker: Custodian, service station attendant Student: Person attending high school or college Unemployed: Persons not working at the present time 65 Month in Which the Accident Occurred There were only two months of the year, January and December, in which no accident occurred. The month of May had the largest number of accidents with eighteen. The seven-month period from April until October had 92 per cent of the accidents. These facts are revealed in Table 8 . TABLE 8 .— Month the motorcycle accident occurred. Number Month Percent February 1 1 March 1 1 April 15 15 May 18 18 June 11 11 July 11 11 August 15 15 September 11 11 October 11 11 6 6 100 100 November Total Day of the Month the Accident Occurred Using a calendar month of thirty-one days, there was only one day of the month on which an accident did 66 not occur. It was the twenty-ninth day. The accident frequencies were fairly well distributed over the month with the thirteenth day having the largest number (18). The data described above may be found in Table 9. TABLE 9.— Day of the month the accident occurred. Number Percent 0-05 20 20 6-10 11 11 11-15 25 25 16-20 15 15 21-25 13 13 26-31 16 16 Total 100 100 Day of the Month Day of the Week the Accident Occurred The day of the week the accident occurred was al­ most evenly distributed over the seven-day period; even though 4 7 per cent of the accidents occurred on the days of Friday, Saturday, and Sunday. This is a rather start­ ling fact when 9 3 per cent of the motorcyclists said they did most of their riding on the week-ends. The breakdown of accidents occurring during the week may be found in Table 10. TABLE 10.— Day of the week the accident occurred. Day of the Week Number Percent Sunday 9 9 Monday 11 11 Tuesday 19 19 Wednesday 12 12 Thursday 11 11 Friday 22 22 Saturday 16 16 100 100 Total Medical Costs of the Motorcycle Accident The medical costs of the motorcycle accidents in this study ranged from $0 to $6 ,500. costs of the accident was $241. The mean of the There were twenty-eight accidents in which there was no medical cost involved. Table 11 shows the medical costs of the motorcycle acci­ dents . 68 TABLE 11.— Medical costs of the motorcycle accidents. Cost of the Accident in Dollars $ Number Percent 000 28 28 1-100 32 32 101-200 13 13 201-500 17 17 501— 1,000 7 7 1 ,001-2 ,000 2 2 over 2,000 1 1 100 100 Total Note: dent is $241. Mean medical cost of the motorcycle acci­ Experience in Riding a Motorcycle The motorcyclists interviewed were found to be more experienced in riding a motorcycle than were found in other studies. Many had a tremendous amount of motor­ cycle riding experience. One interviewee had a total of 300 months which equals 25 years of riding experience. Only three persons interviewed had one month's riding experience at the time of the accident. The mean number of months of riding experience for motorcyclists used in this study was 31.64 months. This mean is high when one considers that 61 per cent of the riders had 18 months of experience or less. This skewing of the mean is caused 69 primarily by the one individual who had 300 months of riding experience. These facts are presented in Table 12. TABLE 12.— Riding experience of motorcyclists in months. Riding Experience in Months Percent Number 0-06 22 22 7-12 26 26 13-18 13 13 19-24 6 6 25-30 7 7 31-36 7 7 over 36 19 19 Total 100 100 Note: Mean riding experience in months is 31.64. Hours of Riding per Week of Motorcyclists Motorcyclists interviewed had a mean number of hours of riding per week of 3.12 hours. The frequencies and percentages in Table 13 show that the number of hours of riding per week is quite evenly distributed with the greatest frequency between 6-10 hours per week and the smallest frequency from 0-5 hours per week. 70 T A B L E 1 3 . — H o u r s of r i d i n g p e r w e e k of m o t o r c y c l i s t s . Number Percent 0-05 13 13 6-10 25 25 11-15 22 22 16-20 17 17 Over 2 0 23 23 Total 100 100 Hours Note: Mean hours of riding per week is 3.12. Does the Motorcyclist Ride Everyday Table 14 shows the frequencies of motorcyclists riding everyday. The table indicates an almost even distribution (51% to 49%) between those who rode everyday and those who did not. TABLE 14.— Does the motorcyclist ride everyday. Number Percent Yes 51 51 No 49 49 100 100 Everyday Total Time of Day the Motorcyclist Generally Rides When asked what time of day the interviewees generally rode their motorcycles, 7 8 per cent said that 71 they rode from 4-8 P.M. rode between 12-8 A.M. in the afternoon. No motorcyclist and only 2 per cent and 3 per cent, respectively, rode between 8-12 P.M. and 8-12 A.M. Table 15 shows these facts. TABLE 15.— Time of day the motorcyclist generally rides. Number Time Percent 12-4 A.M. 0 0 4-8 A.M. 0 0 8-12 Noon 3 3 12-4 P.M. 17 17 4-8 P.M. 78 78 2 2 100 100 8-12 Midnight Total Time of the Accident The interviewees' questionnaires revealed that 7 0 per cent of the accidents occurred between the hours of 12-8 P.M. This is also the period of time of greatest use, as 9 5 per cent of the interviewees stated that they generally rode their motorcycles during these hours Table 15). Table 16. (see The time the accident occurred appears in 72 TABLE 16.— Time of the accident. Number Time Percent 12-4 A.M. 4 4 4-8 A.M. 2 2 8-12 Noon 7 7 12-4 P.M. 35 35 4-8 P.M. 35 35 8-12 Midnight 17 17 100 100 Total Purpose of the Motorcycle The motorcyclists used their motorcycles for recreational purposes 87 per cent of the time. The motor­ cycles were used for racing and work the remaining 13 per cent of the time. These facts are depicted in Table 17. TABLE 17.— Purpose of the motorcycle. W J ..1 Purpose Recreation Racing Work Total J ■ -.. .1 Number ■ '! - ■ n L'jia .i 1 n;— Percent 87 87 2 2 11 11 100 100 73 Day of the Week When Riding Most Likely Occurs Ninety-three per cent of the motorcyclists said they rode mostly on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays. This is consistent with their responses on purpose of the motor­ cycle when 87 per cent said they used their motorcycles for recreational purposes. Table 18 illustrates the re­ sponses of motorcyclists when asked on what day of the week they were most likely to ride their motorcycles. TABLE 18.— Day of the week when riding most likely occurs. Day Number Percent Sunday 46 46 Monday 3 3 Tuesday 0 0 Wednesday 2 2 Thursday 2 2 Friday 9 9 38 38 100 100 Saturday Total Length of Time Riding the Motorcycle When the Accident Occurred The motorcyclists in 9 5 per cent of the cases had been riding for a period of less than two hours when the accident occurred. hours. No one had been riding longer than six These data are presented in Table 19. 74 TABLE 19.— Length of time riding the motorcycle when the accident occurred. Hours Number Percent 0-2 95 95 3-4 4 4 5-6 1 1 6-8 0 0 Over 8 0 0 100 100 Total Kind of Locality Where the Accident Occurred Almost one-half (46%) of the motorcycle accidents occurred in a residential area. However, 4 0 per cent of the accidents occurred in industrial and business areas. Very few happened in rural areas (9%) or near school (5%). This information is found in Table 20. TABLE 20.— Kind of locality where the accident occurred. Kind of Locality Number Percent Industrial 11 11 Shopping or Business 29 29 5 5 46 46 9 9 100 100 School Residential Rural Total 75 Motorcyclist Generally Riding in His Home County Table 21 shows that in only 2 per cent of the cases the interviewees did not generally ride in their home county. TABLE 21.— Motorcyclist generally riding in his home county. Riding in Home County Number Percent Yes 98 98 2 2 100 100 No Total First Time in the Area Where the Accident Occurred Table 22 revealed that in 11 per cent of the cases it was the first time for motorcyclists in the area where the accident occurred. TABLE 22.— First time in the area where the accident occurred. Number Percent Yes 11 11 No 89 89 100 100 First Time in Area Total 76 Occurrences of Riding on the Road Where the Accident Occurred The motorcyclists indicated that they normally rode on the road where the accident occurred at least once a week in 77 per cent of the cases. Only 9 per cent said they had never ridden on the road where the accident occurred. These facts and figures are illustrated in Table 23. TABLE 23.— Occurrences of riding on the road where the accident occurred. "i Occurrences of Percent Number Riding itti— — Everyday 17 17 Twice a week 38 38 Once a week 22 22 Once a month 7 7 Every few months 7 7 Never 9 9 100 100 Total ■ rj. Type of Roadway The type of roadway on which the accident occurred may be found in Table 24. As can be seen in this table, 50 per cent of the accidents occurred on two-lane roadways. Another 31 per cent occurred on four-lane roadways and 8 per cent occurred on one-way streets. Only 4 per cent occurred on divided and limited access roadways. 77 T A B L E 2 4 . — T y p e of roadway. Type of Roadway Number Percent Unpaved— any width 1 1 One-way street 8 8 One driving lane 3 3 50 50 3 3 31 31 Divided roadway 3 3 Limited access 1 1 100 100 Two driving lanes Three driving lanes Four driving lanes Total Type of Road Surface The type of road surface on which the accident occurred was asphalt in 89 per cent of the accidents studied. Nine per cent of the accidents occurred on a concrete roadway and the remaining 2 per cent occurred on a graveled roadway. This information can be found in Table 25. TABLE 25.— Type of road surface. Type of Road Surface Asphalt Concrete Gravel Dirt Total Number 89 9 2 0 100 Percent 89 9 2 0 100 78 Vertical Contour of the Roadway When looking at the vertical contour of the road­ way on which the accidents occurred, one sees that in 9 0 per cent of the cases the roadway was level. 8 per cent were on a slight grade. An additional These facts are found in Table 26. TABLE 26.— Vertical contour of the roadway. Vertical Contour Number Percent 90 90 Slight grade 8 8 Steep grade 1 1 Hill crest 1 1 Dip 0 0 100 100 Level Total Horizontal Contour of the Roadway Presented in Table 27 are the data relative to the horizontal contour of the roadway. This table shows that 82 per cent of the accidents studied occurred on a straight roadway. Eleven per cent were on a slight curve and 7 per cent were on a sharp curve. 79 T A B L E 27.— H o r i z o n t a l c o n t o u r of the roadway. Number Percent Straight 82 82 Slight curve 11 11 Sharp curve 7 7 Other 0 0 100 100 Horizontal Contour Total Highway Condition When asked the condition of the highway at the accident location, no respondent reported the condition to be crowned, with chuck holes, or a "washboard" surface. Table 28 shows this information. TABLE 28.— Highway condition. Highway Condition Percent Number Crowned road 0 0 Chuck holes 0 0 "Washboard" 0 0 100 100 100 100 Other Total Light Conditions Table 29 shows the light conditions for all acci­ dents. This table reveals that the majority, of the accidents occurred during daylight. 63 per cent, Over a fourth, 80 27 per cent, happened at night and 9 per cent happened at dusk. Only 1 per cent occurred at dawn. TABLE 29.— Light conditions. Number Percent Daylight 63 63 Darkness 27 27 Dawn 1 1 Dusk 9 9 100 100 Light Conditions Total Weather Conditions Eighty-three per cent of the motorcycle accidents occurred during clear weather. Cloudy and rain conditions occurred in 12 and 5 per cent, respectively, of the cases. The respondents did not report any other conditions. This information is presented in Table 30. TABLE 30.— Weather conditions. Weather Conditions Clear Cloudy Rain Snow Fog Other Total Number Percent 83 12 5 0 0 0 83 12 5 0 0 0 100 100 81 C o n d i t i o n of t he Ro ad Sur f a c e The condition of the road surface at the time of the accident was dry in 92 per cent of the cases. Wet conditions prevailed in 6 per cent of the cases and no accident occurred when the pavement was snowy or icy. Two per cent of the motorcyclists reported the condition of the road surface as "other." In one case there was gravel on the road surface and in the other case there was sand. These facts are found in Table 31. TABLE 31.— Condition of the road surface. Road Surface Condition Number Percent Dry 92 92 Wet 6 6 Snowy or icy 0 0 Other 2 2 100 100 Total Riding with Headlight On Table 32 shows the responses when the interviewees were asked if they were riding with their headlights on at the time of the accident. 59 per cent were not. Forty-one per cent were and 82 TABLE 3 2 . — R i d i n g w i t h h e a d l i g h t on. Headlight on Number Percent Yes 41 41 No 59 59 100 100 Total Reduced Visibility at the Time of the Accident Presented in Table 33 are the responses of the interviewees when asked if their visibility was reduced at the time of the accident. Nine per cent answered affirmatively and the remaining 91 per cent indicated visibility was not reduced. TABLE 33.— Reduced visibility at the time of the accident. Reduced Visibility Yes No Total Number Percent 9 9 91 91 100 100 Lack of Signs Where the Accident Occurred Table 34 shows that in only 4 per cent of the cases was there a lack of signs where the accident occurred. The other ninety-six said that this was not the case. 83 T A B L E 3 4 . — L a c k of signs w h e r e the a c c i d e n t occurred. Lack of Signs Percent Number Yes No Total 4 4 96 96 100 100 Distractions at the Time the Accident Occurred Table 35 shows that 87 per cent of the interviewee; did not indicate any distractions at the time of the accident. The other 13 per cent said there was some degree of distraction just before the accident occurred. TABLE 35.— Distractions at the time the accident occurred. Distractions Number Percent Yes 13 13 No 87 87 100 100 Total Action Taken to Reduce the Severity of the Accident Table 36 shows the responses of the interviewees when asked if they took any action to reduce the severity of the accident. Fifty-four per cent said they did and 4 6 per cent indicated they did not. The kinds of actions which could have been taken to reduce the severity of the accident were as follows: (1) swerving to the right or to 84 the left, (2) braking hard, (3) laying the motorcycle down, and (4) jumping off the motorcycle. TABLE 36.— Action taken to reduce the severity of the accident. Action Taken Number Percent Yes 54 54 No 46 46 100 100 Total Motorcyclist Upset or Worried Just Prior to the Accident Presented in Table 37 are the responses of the interviewees when asked if they were upset or worried just prior to the accident. In only 2 per cent of the cases was the motorcyclist upset or worried. TABLE 37.— Motorcyclist upset or worried just prior to the accident. Upset or Worried Yes No Total Number Percent 2 2 98 98 100 100 Trip Origination Table 38 indicates the origination of the trip just before the accident occurred. One-half of the 85 interviewees indicated that they were leaving home just prior to the accident. TABLE 38.— Trip origination. Trip Origination Number Percent Work 5 5 Home 50 50 Other 45 45 100 100 Total Trip Destination Two-thirds of the interviewees indicated they were going places other than home or work when the accident occurred. This is revealed in Table 39. TABLE 39.— Trip destination. Trip Destination Number Percent Work 8 8 Home 26 26 Other 66 66 100 100 Total Motorcyclist Riding Differently After the Accident Presented in Table 40 are the responses to the question whether the motorcyclist rode differently after 86 the accident. This table indicates that 60 per cent of the motorcyclists said they were not riding any differently after the accident than before. TABLE 40.— Riding differently after the accident. Riding Differently Number Percent Yes 40 40 No 60 60 100 100 Total Anything Mechanically Wrong with the Motorcycle Table 41 shows that only 4 per cent of the inter­ viewees reported there was something mechanically wrong with the motorcycle just prior to the accident. TABLE 41.— Anything mechanically wrong with the motorcycle. Mechanically Wrong Yes No Total Number Percent 4 4 96 96 100 100 Drinking Prior to the Accident Table 4 2 indicates if the motorcyclist had been drinking prior to the accident. The table shows that six of the seven persons drinking had been drinking beer. 87 Ninety The seventh person had been drinking whiskey, three had not been drinking. TABLE 42.--Drinking prior to the accident. What Drinking Number Percent Beer 6 6 Wine 0 0 Whiskey 1 1 Other 0 0 93 93 100 100 Not drinking Total What Drugs Were Taken Only one interviewee reported using any drugs prior to the motorcycle accident. In this particular case, the interviewee had smoked marijuana. Ninety-nine had not taken any drugs prior to the accident. This in­ formation may be seen in Table 43. TABLE 43.— What drugs were taken. Drugs Taken None Amphetamines Barbituates Tranquilizers Hallucinogens Marijuana Other To tal Number Percent 99 0 0 0 0 1 0 99 0 0 0 0 1 0 100 100 88 Use of Alcohol and Drugs Prior to the Accident Presented in Table 44 is the use of alcohol and drugs prior to the accident. When asked if both alcohol and drugs were used prior to the accident, one respondent replied affirmatively. Apparently the one interviewee, who responded to using drugs as indicated in Table 43, also had used alcohol. The interviewees were previously asked about the use of alcohol or of drugs. Medical re­ search has shown that the use of alcohol and drugs simul­ taneously multiplies the effects; therefore, the inter­ viewees were asked if they had used the combination of alcohol and drugs just prior to the accident. TABLE 44.— Use of alcohol and drugs prior to the accident. Use of Alcohol and Drugs . Number Yes No Total „ Percent 1 1 99 99 100 100 Number of Hours of Motorcycle Riding Instruction The number of hours of motorcycle riding instruc­ tion received by the interviewees may be found in Table 45. Thirty-one per cent of the interviewees received no riding instruction at all, and 51 per cent received only 89 one hour. The remaining 18 per cent received more than one h our . TABLE 45.— Hours of motorcycle riding instruction. Hours of Riding Instruction Number Percent 31 31 1 51 51 2 11 11 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 1 1 6 1 1 Over 6 5 5 100 100 None Total Type of Motorcycle Riding Instruction The type of motorcycle riding instruction re­ ceived by the interviewees is found in Table 46. Sixty- one per cent received verbal instruction, while only 7 per cent received behind-the-wheel instruction. 90 T A B L E 4 6.— T y p e of m o t o r c y c l e r i d i n g instruction. Type of Riding Instruction Number Percent 61 61 Behind-the-wheel 7 7 Not applicable 1 1 31 31 100 100 Verbal None Total Type of Motorcycle Riding Instructor Table 47 shows the type of instructor or the agency from whom the interviewees obtained their motor­ cycle riding instruction. The table shows that most of the instruction being given came from friends from the motorcycle dealers (22%). (36%) and Thirty-one per cent did not receive instruction. TABLE 47.— Type of motorcycle riding instructor. Type of Instructor Driver Education Program Local Safety Council Dealer Parent Friend Not available None Total Number 3 1 22 6 36 1 31 100 Percent 3 1 22 6 36 1 31 100 91 Completion of a Driver Education Program Table 48 presents the responses on whether or not the motorcyclist completed a driver education program. The table shows that motorcyclists in 87 per cent of the cases had completed an approved course in driver education, TABLE 48.— Completion of a driver education program. Driver Education Program ^ Number ,____. Percent Yes 87 87 No 13 13 100 100 Total The Number of Hours of Motorcycle Instruction in the Driver Education Program The interviewees reported in 67 per cent of the cases that there was no motorcycle riding instruction contained in the driver education program. Twenty-five per cent of the interviewees reported that they received one hour of motorcycle instruction in a driver education program. Table 49 shows these facts. 92 TABLE 49.— Number of hours of motorcycle instruction in the driver education program. Hours of Instruction Number Percent 0 67 67 1 25 25 2 8 8 3 0 0 4 0 0 5 0 0 Over 5 0 0 100 100 Total Familiarity with Motorcycle Regulations in Michigan Table 50 shows that in 85 per cent of the cases the interviewees indicated that they were familiar with the motorcycle regulations in the state of Michigan. TABLE 50.— Familiarity with motorcycle regulations in Michigan. Familiarity with Regulations Number Percent Ye s 85 85 No 15 15 100 100 T o tal 93 Motorcycle Insured Table 51 shows that there were only six inter­ viewees who reported that their motorcycles were not in­ sured at the time of the accident. TABLE 51.— Motorcycle insured. Insured Number Yes No Total Percent 94 94 6 6 100 100 Motorcyclist Wearing Protective Gear at the Time of the Accident Table 52 shows the responses of the interviewees to whether or not they wore protective gear at the time of the accident. Ninety-eight per cent of the interview­ ees reported that they were wearing a helmet at the time of the accident. Only 36 per cent of the interviewees reported wearing goggles or a face shield, only 23 per cent wore boots, and only 21 per cent reported wearing protective clothing. 94 TABLE 52.— Motorcyclist wearing protective gear at the time of the accident. Protective Gear Response Number Percent Protective Helmet Yes No Total 98 2 100 98 2 100 Goggles or Face Shield Yes No Total 36 64 100 36 64 100 Boots Yes No Total 23 77 100 23 77 100 Protective Clothing Yes No Total 21 79 100 21 79 100 Motorcyclist Took a Special Operator 's Examination Table 53 shows that in 68 per cent of the cases the interviewees took a special examination to operate a motorcycle. TABLE 53.— Motorcyclist took a special operator1s examination. Special Examination Number Yes 68 68 No 32 32 100 100 Total Percent 95 Motorcycle Owned by the Interviewee Table 54 shows that in 87 per cent of the cases the motorcycle was owned by the interviewee. TABLE 54.— Motorcycle owned by the interviewee. 1- « I— — — — — » ^ » l_ ■ U I — _)_» L - — ■ ■ I - ' ■ I fc.— -*-■ . Ownership ■ - ■■ .. - |_ _ _ Number _ . _j_ _ — - '_i — _ . . . ■ ^ Percent Yes 87 87 No 13 13 100 100 Total Thought Just Before the Accident Occurred The interviewees were asked to give their thoughts just before the accident occurred. sults of their statements. Table 55 shows the re­ Thirty-two per cent of the interviewees either did not remember or were thinking of nothing in particular. going home. Twelve per cent were thinking of Nine per cent were thinking of just riding the motorcycle and 8 per cent were just trying to ride. 96 TABLE 55.— Thought just before the accident occurred. Thought Nothing in particular D o n 't remember Going home Just riding Trying to ride the bike About the weather conditions Girlfriend riding with me Going to work My passenger and I were talking Concentrating on the traffic Going shopping Riding— making a left turn Going to visit friends Getting something to eat Going to class The looks of the other driver Another motorcycle Trying to place in a motorcycle race My father No answer Total Number Percent 16 16 12 9 8 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 16 16 12 9 8 5 4 4 4 4 3 3 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 2 100 100 Violation the Motorcyclist Was Charged with in Connection with the Accident The most frequent violation the motorcyclists were charged with was the failure to yield the right-ofway. Table 56 shows the breakdown of the violations. Seventy-eight per cent of the motorcyclists were not charged with a violation. 97 TABLE 56.— Violation the motorcyclist was charged with in connection with the accident. Violation Number Percent 78 78 Speeding 5 5 Failure to Yield 7 7 Disobeying Traffic Signal 0 0 No Operator's License 3 3 No Insurance 3 3 Other 4 4 100 100 None Total Advice of Motorcyclist to Prevent the Accident The interviewees were asked to give their advice to other motorcyclists on how to prevent this type of accident. Table 57 shows that 50 per cent, the most fre­ quest response, said they would advise other motorcyclists to ride more defensively— watching out for automobiles. The motorcyclists also gave a total of eighteen other different suggestions which are found in Table 57. 98 TA B L E 57.— A d v i c e of m o t o r c y c l i s t s to p r e v e n t t h e accident, Advice Ride defensively, watching out for automobiles Pay attention to the road at all times When there is a lot of traffic, slow down Ride the motorcycle at a speed where you can control it Ride with headlight on during the day Be familiar with the motorcycle Don't follow cars too closely Slow down in unfamiliar environment Slow down in rain Keep the motorcycle in good condition Be sure to look both ways before pulling into traffic Don't ride in traffic Never pull off the road into loose gravel or sand Don't "show off" on the motorcycle Ride in the left side of the lane so other drivers can see you Know how to dismount the motorcycle to prevent injury Be very careful when accelerating Boycott Motorcycle Club events (unsafe practices advocated) When riding by a farm, make sure there are no animals out by the road where they might get into the roadway D o n 't know None Total Number Percent 50 7 50 7 5 5 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 2 100 100 99 Causes of the Motorcycle Accident As Stated by the Interviewee As can be seen in Table 58, there were numerous causes of the motorcycle accidents. However, 28 per cent of the interviewees stated that cars pulled out in front of them. Also, 19 per cent of the accidents were caused by cars turning left in front of the motorcycles. These facts, as well as many others, are found in Table 58. TABLE 58.— Causes of the motorcycle accident as stated by the interviewee. Cause Car pulled out in front of me Car turned left in front of me Going too fast Accelerated too fast Looking down and hit a large rock Weaving in the lane and hit a passing car Front fork loose and began bouncing and lost control Unfamiliar with the road Unfamiliar with the motorcycle Pulling out of a driveway into the path of a car Cars stopped in front of me and I hit them in the rear Car turned into me X hit a rock and the rear tire blew out I turned left into the side of a car I pulled out in front of a car at an intersection Car cut me off in a lane of traffic Improper backing of a car Car hit me from the rear Truck hit me from the rear I released the clutch too fast I had trouble controlling the motor­ cycle— inexperience Inadequate road signs Skidded in loose gravel Sand on the road surface I changed lanes and hit a car in the rear Number Percent 28 19 11 5 2 1 28 19 11 5 2 1 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 o 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 100 T ABL E 58.— Continu ed. Cause Number I I I A A looked away and hit the curb was turning a curve and looked away went over an open sewer top youth threw a large ball at me cow ran into the roadway and I hit the cow I c a n 't remember Total Percent 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 100 100 Case Studies Presented in this section are fifteen case studies. These case studies were determined by the accident cate­ gories found in Table 3. The case studies that were presented were typical of all motorcycle accidents in this study. It was hoped that the case studies would give further insight into the data related to these motorcycle accidents. In reference to the use of these case studies, traffic safety educators, when teaching motorcycle rider education, could utilize these studies in the classroom. In presenting these case studies, the educators would be able to point out the con­ ditions under which motorcycle accidents happen and the most common hazards to prospective motorcycle riders. Included in each case study is a situational dia­ gram illustrating the scene of the accident. This diagram includes signs, symbols, identifying persons, vehicles. 101 and other objects that aid in clarifying the accident scene. Data presented in each case study were as follows: 1. Type of Accident 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway a. Type b. Surface c. Character d. Condition 3. Kind of Locality 4. Time 5. Light Conditions 6. Weather Conditions 7. Traffic Conditions 8. Vehicle Information 9. a. Make b. Model c. Year d. Condition Driver Data a. Sex b. Age c. Driving Experience d. Violation in connection with the accident 10. Narrative Account of the Accident 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident 102 Case Number 1 1. Type of Accident: 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway a. Type: 1 lane b. Surface: dry c. Character: straight and level d. Condition: good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Light Conditions: Car pulled in front of motorcycle School 10:35 A.M., April 15 Daylight 6 . Weather Conditions: Clear 7. Heavy Traffic Conditions: 8 . Vehicle Information a. Make: Harley-Davidson b. Model: Sportster c. Year: 1969 d. Condition: Good 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 26 c. Riding Experience: 10 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: No violation in connection with the accident. Note: The driver of the car was charged with failure to yield the right-of-way. 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: Dan, who was working the morning of the accident, left work to go home to pick up some of his work equipment. While traveling through a school area on his way back to work, a car pulled out in front of him. The impact of this collision caused Dan and the motorcycle to swerve to the right, hitting a car parked on the right side of the road. Because both were traveling at a very low rate of speed, Dan was not injured in this accident. Dan was wearing a protective helmet and face shield, but was wearing no protective clothing or boots. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 1). 103 Stop Sign O One Way Yield Yield A One W a y ----------------------------------------- O Stop Sign FI G U R E 1 .— C a r P u l l e d in F r o n t of M o t o r cy cle . 104 Case Number 2 1. Type of Accident: 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway a. Type: 2 lanes b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Straight and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Light Conditions: Car pulled in front of motorcycle Residential 2:35 P.M., April 9 Daylight 6 . Weather Conditions: Clear 7. Moderate Traffic Conditions: 8. Vehicle Information: a. Make: Triumph b. Model: 500 c. Year: 1969 d. Condition: Good 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 19 c. Riding Experience: 2 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: No violation in connection with the accident. Note: Other driver was charged with failure to yield right-of-way. 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: Larry had been out in the country riding his motor­ cycle and was returning home when the accident occurred. He was riding down a two-lane street when a car pulled up from a side street. Larry did not have enough time or space to avoid hitting the other car. As is the case of many other motorcyclists, Larry received some cuts and bruises from the accident but was not hurt seriously. However, the accident could have been more serious; Larry hit his head on the pavement, but he was wearing a protective helmet. Larry was also wearing a face shield but was wearing no protective clothing or boots. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 2). 105 Stop Sign \ \ \ Stop Sign O I N FI G U R E 2 . — Car P u l l e d in F r o n t of M o t o r c y c l e . 106 Case N u m b e r 1. 2. Type of Accident: 3 Motorcycle pulled in front of car Environmental Conditions— Roadway: a. Type: 2 lanes b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Straight and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Light Conditions: Residential 4:20 P.M., September 11 Daylight 6 . Weather Conditions: Cloudy 7. Moderate Traffic Conditions: 8 . Vehicle Information: a. Make: Suzuki b. Model: 125 c. Year: 1970 d. Condition: Excellent 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 18 c. Riding Experience: 3 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: Failure to yield right-of-way 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: Tom had been over to a friend's house late one after­ noon and was starting home. However, he did not get very far. He pulled out of a driveway in front of an oncoming car. Tom received some serious cuts, bruises, and internal injuries. He was wearing a protective helmet and b o o t s , but was not wearing protective clothing. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 3). 107 Driveway FIGURE 3.— M o t o r c y c l e P u l l e d in F r o n t of Car. 108 Case Number 4 1. Type of Accident: cycle. 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway: a. Type: 2 lanes b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Straight and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Car turned left in front of motor­ Residential 6:05 P.M., April 7 Light Conditions: Daylight 6 . Weather Conditions: Clear 7. Light Traffic Conditions: 8 . Vehicle Information: a. Make: Triumph b. Model: 650 c. Year: 1968 d. Condition: Fair 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 22 c. Riding Experience: 8 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: No violation in connection with the accident. Note: The driver of the car was charged with failure to yield right-of-way, 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: David was going to visit some friends the afternoon of the accident. He was riding in a residential area not far from his destination when an old man turned left in front of him. He stated that the other driver apparently did not see him when the driver of the car began to make a left turn. David said that he was going too fast to avoid hitting the other car. When David saw that a collision was unavoidable, he slowed down as much as possible and swerved to the right. Fortunately, this action could be responsible for David not having any injuries as a result of the acci­ dent. David was wearing a protective helmet but no other protective clothing. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 4). 109 I O Bridge Stop Sign Stop Sign Q I I I / FI G U R E / I I I I / / 4.— C ar T u r n e d L e f t in F r o n t of M o t o r c y c l e . 110 Case Number 5 1. Type of Accident: motorcycle. 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway: a. Type: 4-lane b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Straight and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Car turned left in front of Shopping or Business 4:20 P.M., August 5 Light Conditions: Daylight 6 . Weather Conditions: Clear 7. Heavy Traffic Conditions: 8. Vehicle Information: a. Make: Yamaha b. Model: 175 c. Year: 1971 d. Condition: Good 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b . Age: 25 c. Riding Experience: 3 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: No violation in connection with the accident. Note: The driver of the car was charged with failure to yield the right-of-way. 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: Charles had been shopping with some friends and de­ cided to go to an ice cream shop about 2 miles away for some ice cream. While on his way to the ice cream shop, the driver of a car, who apparently did not see him, turned left in front of him going into a driveway. Charles was traveling in the far right lane going approximately 3 5 mph. He said he had paid no particular attention to the car until it began to turn in front of him. Charles received severe cuts and bruises on both right limbs as well as broken bones in both right limbs. He also sustained some damage to the rib cage. Charles was wearing a pro­ tective helmet and boots. However, he did not have on a protective face shield or protective clothing. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 5) . FI G U R E 5.— C a r T u r n e d L e f t in F r o n t of M o t o r c y c l e 112 Case Number 6 1. Type of Accident: 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway: a. Type: 2 lanes b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Straight and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Light Conditions: Car turned into motorcycle Shopping or business 10:55 P.M., June 2 2 Dark with street lights 6 . Weather Conditions: Clear 7. Moderate Traffic Conditions: 8. Vehicle Information: a. Make: Honda b. Model: 3 50 c. Year: 1969 d. Condition: Good 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 21 c. Riding Experience: 5 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: No violation in connection with the accident. 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: Tom was out riding his motorcycle late one evening. He was going no place in particular and was enjoying the ride very much. He was riding very near the right edge of the roadway. Tom noticed a car that was straddling the line and taking up two lanes. Then, at the next intersection, Tom decided to pass on the right side. At that moment the driver of the car turned right and hit him as he was passing. The driver of the car had a vision obstruction and did not see the passing motorcycle. As a result of the accident, Tom received numerous cuts and bruises along with a broken knee cap. Tom was wearing a protective helmet but was not wearing any other protective equip­ ment. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 6 ). 113 Traffic Light FI G U R E 6 .— Car T u r n e d Into M o t o r c y c l e . 114 Case Number 7 1. Type of Accident: 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway: a. Type: 2 lanes b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Straight and level d. Condition: Good 3. 4. 5. Kind of Locality: Time: Cycle turned into car Rural 10:50 A.M., September 3 Light Conditions: Daylight 6 . Weather Conditions: Cloudy 7. Light Traffic Conditions: 8. Vehicle Information: a. Make: Honda b. Model: 9 0 c. Year: 1970 d. Condition: Excellent 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 18 c. Riding Experience: 2months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: No violation in connection with the accident. 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: Tim had only ridden his motorcycle very few times and was not completely familiar with it at the time of the accident. On the morning of the accident Tim had ridden his motorcycle out to a very lightly traveled road to get some additional riding experience. As he was traveling down the highway at approximately 10 mph, he was having difficulty controlling his motorcycle. He then realized a car was coming up behind him, so he decided to pull into the open field just to the left of the highway. Tim failed to perceive the car that was passing him until it was too late. He turned left into the passing car. Fortunately for Tim the car had slowed down and he received only a minor bruise as a result of the accident. Tim was wearing a protective helmet and a face shield but no protec­ tive clothing. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 7). 115 I I I I I FIGURE 7. — Cyc le T u r n e d Into Car. 116 Case N u m b e r 8 1. Type of Accident: 2. Environmental Conditions--Roadway: a. Type: 2 lanes b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Sharp curve and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Light Conditions: Ran off roadway Rural 10:37 P.M., July 17 Dark 6 . Weather Conditions: Dry 7. Light Traffic Conditions: 8 . Vehicle Information: a. Make: Honda b. Model: 500 c. Year: 1970 d. Condition: Good 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 30 c. Riding Experience: 14 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: No violation in connection with the accident. 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: Richard was riding his motorcycle late one night in an unfamiliar area. He came upon a very sharp curve to the left and saw that he could not make the sharp curve. Richard then moved to the shoulder and tried to stop but hit some loose gravel and skidded over into a private yard. Richard received multiple bruises and some internal injuries. He was wearing a protective helmet and face shield but no protective clothing or boots. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 8 ). 118 Case Number 9 1. Type of Accident: 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway: a. Type: 2 lanes b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Sharp curve to right and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Light Conditions: Ran off roadway Rural 12:40 P.M., April 20 Daylight 6 . Weather Conditions: Clear 7. Very light Traffic Conditions: 8 . Vehicle Information: a. Make: Honda b. Model: 750 c. Year: 1970 d. Condition: Fair 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 21 c. Riding Experience: 8 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: No violation in connection with the accident. 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: Glen was out in an unfamiliar rural area riding his motorcycle the day the accident occurred. He was riding his motorcycle faster than he should have been in this area. He came upon a sharp curve and, be­ cause of his limited riding experience, could not slow down enough to negotiate the curve. By not making the curve, he ran off the roadway and crashed into a guardrail along side the roadway. He received multi­ ple cuts, bruises, a broken leg, and a mild con­ cussion. Glen was wearing a protective helmet, but it must be noted here that the helmet he was wearing was cracked down the seams where it had been molded together. Glen was not wearing any other protective equipment. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 9). 119 Guardrail Q FIGURE 9.— Ran Off Roadway. 120 Case N u m b e r 10 1. Type of Accident: Over-turning in roadway 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway: a. Type: 2 limited access b. Surface: Dry cCharacter: Straight and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Light Conditions: 6. Weather Conditions: Clear 7. Traffic Conditions: Light 8. Vehicle Information: a. Make: Triumph b. Model: Scrambler c. Year: 1969 d. Condition: Fair 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 24 c. Riding Experience: 16 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: No violation in connection with the accident. Industrial 1:00 P.M., July 10 Daylight 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: Robert, a student, had some time between classes; he decided to ride his motorcycle for about an hour. He had been riding for approximately 2 0 minutes when he decided to get on an expressway. About 5 minutes after entering the expressway, his motorcycle began vibrating and bouncing from left to right. He tried to control the motorcycle but could not and subse­ quently overturned in the roadway. After the motor­ cycle overturned, the cycle and Robert skidded down the pavement approximately 100 feet. Robert did not know that the front fork of his motorcycle was loose and therefore could have caused the accident. Robert received multiple cuts and bruises as a result of the accident. Robert did not sustain any head injuries. He was wearing a protective helmet; however, he was not wearing any protective clothing or boots. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 10). FIGURE 10.— Over-turning in Roadway. 122 C a s e N u m b e r 11 1. Type of Accident: 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway: a. Type: 4 lanes b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Straight and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Light Conditions: Over-turning in roadway Industrial 3:30 P . M . , May 15 Daylight 6 . Weather Conditions: Clear 7. Heavy Traffic Conditions: 8 . Vehicle Information: a. Make: Honda b. Model: 3 50 c. Year: 1971 d. Condition: Excellent 9. 10. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 21 c. Riding Experience: 2 0 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: Violation connected with the accident. Narrative Account of the Accident: Roger had been across town to visit some friends. He left his friends' house and was on his wav home. At the time he was on his way home the traffic in that particular area was extremely heavy. Roger was travel­ ing about 35 mph when the car in front of him suddenly stopped for traffic ahead. Roger was traveling so fast that he could not stop in time to avoid hitting the vehicle in the rear. He applied his brakes and the cycle went into a skid and over-turned in the roadway. He did not hit the other vehicle, but his cycle continued on for approximately 2 00 feet before coming to a stop. Roger was wearing a protective helmet and boots and was not seriously injured. How­ ever, he did receive some cuts and bruises. Roger said that he could have avoided the accident had he not been traveling quite so fast. ** 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 11). 123 t 4 5 mph Speed Sign Traffic Lights F IGURE 11. — O v e r - t u r n i n g in Roadway. 124 C a s e N u m b e r 12 1. Type of Accident: Cycle hit object in roadway 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway: a. Type: 2 lanes b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Straight and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Light Conditions: 6. Weather Conditions: Dry 7. Traffic Conditions: Light 8. Vehicle Information: a. Make: Kawasaki b. Model: 300 c. Year: 1969 d. Condition: Good 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 14 c. Riding Experience: 1 month d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: No violation in connection with the accident. Residential 6:55 P.M., August 2 Clear 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: Even though he did not have an operator's license, Jerry was out in the late afternoon learning to rids his motorcycle. Jerry was traveling on the north shoulder of a two-lane road when he hit a large rock. This caused the motorcycle to skid on the pavement one way while Jerry skidded on the pavement the other way. Jerry received multiple cuts, bruises, and slight internal injuries. He was wearing a protective helmet, but if he had not been wearing a helmet, there would have been a good possibility that he would have received serious head injuries. Jerry was not wearing any protective clothing or b o o t s . 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 12). 125 O Stop Sign Stop Sign O N Rock FI GUR E 12.— C ycle H i t O b j e c t in Ro adw ay 126 C a s e N u m b e r 13 1. Type of Accident: 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway: a. Type: 3 lanes b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Straight and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Light Conditions: Rear-end collision Shopping or business 2:09 P.M., May 14 Daylight 6 . Weather Conditions: Clear 7. Heavy Traffic Conditions: 8 . Vehicle Information: a. Make: Yamaha b. Model: 150 c. Year: 1970 d. Condition: Good 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 19 c. Riding Experience: 9 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: No violation in connection with the accident 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: John left home one afternoon to visit some friends across town. While on the way over, he was enjoying the thrill of riding and not paying particular atten­ tion to the traffic situation. Suddenly two cars stopped in front of John to pick up hitchhikers. John could not stop in time to avoid hitting the car from the rear. Since John was not traveling at a high rate of speed, there was very minor vehicle damage and personal injury. However, John did have one or two bumps and bruises. John was wearing a protective helmet and face shield, but neither protective cloth­ ing or boots. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 13). 127 One Way Traffic Lights FIGURE 1 3.— R e a r - e n d Collision. 128 C a s e N u m b e r 14 1. Type of Accident: 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway: a. Type: 4 lanes b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Straight and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Light Conditions: Motorcycle hit car from rear Residential 10:15 A . M . , July 22 Daylight 6 . Weather Conditions: Cloudy 7. Light Traffic Conditions: 8 . Vehicle Information: a. Make: Honda b. Model: 350 c. Year: 1971 d. Condition: Good 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 34 c. Riding Experience: 2 4 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: Failure to stop. 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: James left his home on the way to do some shopping. He was traveling about 50 miles per hour when the car in front of him began slowing down to turn to the right. James saw that he could not stop in time to avoid hitting the car in the rear. He then laid his motorcycle down and jumped off sustaining multiple cuts and bruises. His motorcycle continued on and struck the automobile from the rear. James was wear­ ing a protective helmet but no protective clothing or boots. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 14). 129 Stop Sign FIGURE 14.— M o t o r c y c l e H i t Car f r o m Rear. / 130 C a s e N u m b e r 15 1. Type of Accident: 2. Environmental Conditions— Roadway: a. Type: 2 lanes b. Surface: Dry c. Character: Straight and level d. Condition: Good 3. Kind of Locality: 4. Time: 5. Light Conditions: Cycle hit parked car Residential 4:50 P.M., July 7 Daylight 6 . Weather Conditions: Clear 7. Light Traffic Conditions: 8 . Vehicle Information: a. Make: Honda b. Model: 2 50 c. Year: 1968 d. Condition: Good 9. Driver Data: a. Sex: Male b. Age: 42 c. Riding Experience: 12 months d. Violation in Connection with the Accident: No violation in connection with the accident. 10. Narrative Account of the Accident: Robert was riding his motorcycle late one afternoon after work. He was going no place in particular and had been riding for approximately 3 0 minutes. While going down the street, he lost control of his motor­ cycle for no apparent reason and hit a parked car. Robert received only a minor bruise from this acci­ dent since he was traveling at a very low rate of speed. He was wearing a protective helmet but no proteceive clothing or boots. 11. Situational Diagram of the Accident (see Figure 15). 131 Stop Sign £) FI GUR E 1 5.— C y c l e H i t P a r k e d Car 132 Summary An analysis of the data was presented in Chapter IV. Chapter V will contain the Summary, Conclusions, Implications, Recommendations for Further Research, and a Discussion. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS The preceding chapter contained an analysis of the data. In this chapter may be found the summary, conclu­ sions, implications, recommendations for further study, and a discussion. Summary The primary purpose of this study was to deter­ mine the strength of relationship between selected vari­ ables and the severity of the motorcycle accidents. The medical cost of the motorcycle accident was used as the criterion to determine the severity of the motorcycle accident. Seventeen variables were compared to the medi­ cal cost of the accident. The secondary purpose of the study was to seek out and show possible causal factors related to motorcycle accidents. To give further insight into the possible causal factors of motorcycle accidents, studies were developed. fifteen case In addition to the case studies, a situational diagram of each accident was presented. 133 134 The sample population of this study consisted of 100 persons who were involved in motorcycle accidents in Ingham County, Michigan in 19 71. They were randomly selected from a total universe of 323. males and 2 females in the sample. There were 98 The data were gathered between March 15, 1972 and August 15, 1972. The subjects ranged from fifteen to seventy-one years of age. All were residents of the state of Michigan and had varying degrees of educational achievement ranging from the ninth grade to a Ph.D. degree. Sixty per cent of the persons interviewed were either students or non-skilled w o r kers . The persons who were randomly selected for this study were sent letters of introduction and were tele­ phoned to set up a personal interview. The interview lasted approximately twenty-five minutes. The hypotheses were tested by employing the Pearson Product Moment Correlation Test. The .05 level of signifi­ cance was predetermined to be acceptable in this study. Fifteen case studies were presented to give a better pic­ ture of how the motorcycle accidents were occurring. These were selected by accident category and were typical of all the other accidents. The major findings of this investigation were as follows: No significance was found when the medical costs of the accidents were correlated with any of the seventeen variables. Seventy per cent of the motorcyclists were between the ages of fifteen and twenty-four. Forty-eight per cent of the motorcyclists in this study had one year or less of motorcycle riding experience. One-fourth of the motorcyclists rode their motorcycles six to ten hours per week. Ninety-five per cent generally rode their motor­ cycles during the hours of 12-8 P.M. and, during this time, 7 0 per cent of the accidents occurred. The motorcyclists used their motorcycles for recreational purposes 87 per cent of the time. Ninety-three per cent of the motorcyclists said they rode mostly on Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays. In 95 per cent of the cases the motorcyclists had been riding for a period of two hours or less. Almost one-half (46%) of the motorcycle accidents occurred in a residential area. Fifty per cent of the motorcycle accidents occurred on a two-lane roadway. 136 11. Ninety per cent of the accidents occurred on a level roadway. 12. Eighty-two per cent of the accidents occurred on a straight roadway. 13. Sixty-three per cent of the accidents occurred during daylight. 14. Ninety-two per cent of the accidents occurred on a dry road surface. 15. The motorcyclists reported in 87 per cent of the cases that there were no distractions just prior to the accident. 16. Only seven interviewees reported any drinking just prior to the accident, and only one reported using alcohol and drugs. 17. Fifty-one per cent of the motorcyclists reported only one hour of motorcycle riding instruction and, in 58 per cent of the cases, this instruction was given by friends or a motorcycle dealer. 18. One-fourth of the motorcyclists reported receiving one hour of motorcycle instruction in a driver education program. 19. Ninety-eight per cent of the motorcyclists reported wearing a helmet at the time of the accident. 137 20. Only 36 per cent of the motorcyclists reported wearing goggles or a face shield at the time of the accident. 21. The motorcyclists in 23 per cent of the cases were wearing boots at the time of the accident. 22. Only 21 per cent of the motorcyclists reported wearing any protective clothing at the time of the accident. 23. The motorcyclists in 22 per cent of the cases were charged with a violation; the most frequent violation was failure to yield 24. (7). The motorcyclists were asked to give advice on how to avoid the accident in which they were involved and in 50 per cent of the cases they reported to ride more defensively, watching out for auto­ mobiles. 25. The motorcyclists were asked to give the major cause of the accident in which they were involved and in 47 per cent of the cases they reported that an automobile either pulled out in front of them or turned left in front of them. Conclusions The following are the conclusions based upon the findings of this investigation: 138 1. Motorcyclists are not seen by motorists in the traffic system. 2. Motorsists are not aware of motorcyclists in the traffic system. 3. Motorcycle accidents occur under ideal road and weather conditions. 4. Motorcyclists are not sufficiently trained to ride a motorcycle. 5. Some motorcyclists were riding without being fully familiar with the controls of a motorcycle. 6. The majority of the motorcyclists do not protect themselves from injury in an accident other than wearing a helmet. 7. The use of alcohol and drugs were not significant factors in motorcycle accidents. Implications There are several implications from this study for motorcyclists as well as for legislative authorities and traffic safety educators. The motorcycle and motorcyclist must be made more visible in the traffic system. To accomplish this the motorcyclist must be taught to wear brightly colored protective clothing. The motorcyclist must also be taught to ride with the headlight on at all times; this most certainly will make him clearly visible. 139 The motorcyclist must also be taught to ride in the left portion of the traffic lane so that he will be more clearly visible to motorists. The motorcyclist must wear more protective gear other than a helmet. There is a definite need for more formal motor­ cycle rider education. The state department of education as well as local boards of education need to explore the possibilities of setting up classes in motorcycle riding instruction for young people and adults. There could possibly be a problem, though, of getting qualified per­ sonnel to conduct these classes. Traffic safety educators need to include motorcycle safety education in their driver education classes. These would include high school and college students and adults as well. There are also implications for legislative authorities in regard to the licensing procedures for motorcycle operators. must be mandatory. Licensing for motorcycle operators The licensing procedure for motor­ cyclists must be up-graded to ascertain whether or not the motorcyclists have adequate knowledge of motorcycles and whether they are familiar with the controls on the motor­ cycle. The licensing procedure must also test basic skills in riding the motorcycle such as shifting, acceler­ ating, and turning. In addition to the educational and legislative implications, there are implications for public information 140 campaigns. Through public media the public must be in­ formed that motorcyclists ride more during ideal weather conditions. This means motorists need to be more aware of motorcyclists under ideal weather conditions. Motor­ ists also must be made aware of the general presence of motorcyclists in the traffic system. ists simply do not see motorcyclists. It seems that motor­ Traffic safety edu­ cators can also aid in this area by stressing the presence of motorcyclists to their respective classes. Recommendations for Further Study 1. A parallel study should be done on non-traffic motorcycle accidents. 2. A study of various kinds of safety equipment on motorcycles and how these might be improved by design or relocation to make the motorcycle safer. 3. Manufacturers of motorcycles should undertake a study to make motorcycles more visible for motor­ ists. 4. A similar study should be undertaken using a different criterion for the severity of the motorcycle accident. 5. Similar studies should be undertaken in different geographical areas. 141 Discussion The research design of this study was different from most other studies of motorcycle accidents. Many of the other studies were of a statistical nature and had a larger sample size. The other studies with the exception of one did not use the case study approach. This study used statistical analysis, frequencies, percentages, and the case study approach. The statistical section of this study used the medical cost of the motorcycle accident as the index for severity. It was thought that even though there might be very little property damage an accident victim could be injured most severely. This would be indi­ cated by the medical costs of the accident. The findings of this study seemed to differ from those of other studies. Some of the other studies found the variables of age and riding experience to be signifi­ cant. This study did not find these to be significant. The sample size of this study seemed to cause problems because of its size. Some of the variables did not generate enough respondents to be reliable. the variable of sex had only two females. For example, The variable of motorcycle riding experience was distorted by a few of the respondents because they had many years of riding experience. In addition, the variable of alcohol and drugs provided only a small number of respondents. 142 If the study was to be redone, there would be some things that would be changed. The sample size would be larger and the mail-out questionnaire format would be used. The personal interviews, which were too time- consuming, did not allow for a very large sample size. There were also problems in setting up the interviews. In addition, there would be some other variables that should be considered. The size of the motorcycle, the type of motorcycle— one for riding on the street or one for riding on a trail— and the color of clothing the motor­ cyclist was wearing should be considered. When the motor­ cyclist was involved in an accident with a four-wheeled vehicle, the driver of the other vehicle should be ques­ tioned also to try to determine the cause of the accident. Traffic safety educators can do much to aid the motorists in being aware of the two-wheeled vehicle on the roadway. In driver education classes the students must be made aware of the motorcycles in traffic. Visual aids used in driver education should point out that motor­ cyclists are highway users. By studying previous acci­ dents, traffic safety educators can point out the hazards involved with the mixing of automobiles and motorcycles on the roadway. By disseminating information to the public through the mass media, traffic safety educators can inform the public about the dangers of mixing auto­ mobiles and motorcycles on the roadway. The public must 143 also be informed that the motorcycle has the same rights and privileges as any other vehicle using the roadway. There should be some designated off-road areas for unrestricted motorcycle use so that the motorcyclists would have a relatively safe place to ride. It seems now that the public highway is very hazardous for motorcyclists. In the cities of Lansing and East Lansing there should be specially designated traffic lanes for motorcyclists to use. These lanes should be clearly marked with yellow warning signs and be to the far right-hand side of the roadway. It would seem that a large portion of the motor­ cycle accident problem would be solved if only the motor­ ists and motorcyclists would learn to coexist in our traffic system. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY "Air Force Holds Seminar on Two-Wheeler Accidents." Traffic Safety, LXVII (February, 1967), 19. American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA). Motorcycle Regulation Needs and Suqgested Legislation. Washington, D.C.: AAMVA, 1967. Arizona Highway Department. Arizona's Traffic Accident Summary for 19 68. Arizona: Highway Department, 1969. Baker, J. Stannard. "Case Studies of Traffic Accidents." Traffic Safety Research Review, V (December, 1961) , 16. Baker, J. Stannard, and Stebbins, William R . , Jr. Dictionary of Highway Traffic. Evanston, Illinois: Traffic Institute, Northwestern University, 1964. Barry, Patricia Z. The Role of Inexperience in Motorcycle Crashes. Chapel Hill, N.C.: Highway Safety Re­ search Center, 1970. Berry, W. T . , Jr. "The Motorcycle in Today's Traffic." National Safety Congress Transactions, XXIV (1967), 16-19. Biesheuvel, S., and Barnes, P. M. "A Study of Motorcycle Accidents; An Analysis of Their Incidence and of the Factors that Influence Their Occurrence." South African Journal of Science (January, 1958), 3-16. Bothwell, P. W. "The Problem of Motorcycle Accidents." Practitioner, CLXXXVIII (April, 1962), 474-88. Boyd, Alan S. "National Highway Safety." XXXV (December, 1968), 41-43. 144 Police C h ief, 145 Brammer, Dana B. A Look at the Motorcycle Problem. Public Administration Survey, School of Business and Government. Vol. XIV. University: University of Mississippi, January, 1967. Campbell, E. 0.; Macbeth, M. E . ; and Ryan, S. W. Motor­ cycle Accidents Ottawa Area 1967. Ottawa: Traffic Injury ResearVH~Foundation of Canada, 1967. Clark, D. W . , and Morton, J. H. "The Motorcycle Accident: A Growing Problem." Journal of Trauma, II, No. 3 (March, 1971), 230-37. Clark, Janet. "Coexisting with the Car: Handy Tips for Two-Wheel Survival." Detroit Free Press, June 6, 1971. Connecticut State Motor Vehicle Department. Facts 1968. Connecticut: State Motor Vehicle Department, T969. Coppin, R. The Incidence of Accidents and Violations Among"Motorcycle Drivers in California. Sacramento: California State Department of Motor Vehicles, 19 67. County of Monroe Sheriff's Department. Annual Report 19 68 County of Monroe, New Y o r k . New York: County of Monroe Sheriff's Department, 19 69. Crancer, Alfred. Motorcycle Fatality Study, 1965 and 1966 Data. Olympia: Washington Department of Motor Vehicles, 1967. Dark, H. E. "Your Youngster and the Motorcycle." T o d a y 's Health Magazine, XLV, No. 5 (May, 19 67) , 21-2T4". Davidson, Walter E. "What the Motorcycle-Motorscooter Industry Is Doing to Promote Safe Operation." Traffic Digest and Review, XV, No. 1 (January, 1« r r , 14-167 ------------- Dellehunt, R. C. Causative Factors and Corrective Needs in 14 8 Injured Motorcyclists. Chicago: American Medical Association Committee on Medical Aspects of Automotive Safety, 197 0. Department of Motor Vehicles. A Review of Motorcycle Problems in New York State. Albany: Department of Motor V ehicles, 1^66. Accident Facts 1967. Motor Vehicles, 1967. Albany: Department of 146 Department of Motor Vehicles. Motorcycle Accidents in New York State in 19 62. Albany: Department of Motor Vehicles, 196 3. Department of Public Works and Buildings. The Motorcycle in Traffic Accidents, Illinois 1966. Springfield: Department of Public Works and Buildings, 1967. Department of State Police. Michigan Traffic Accident Facts. East Lansing: Department of State Police, 1970. Dietzel, Paul. "Can Motorcycling Be Safe?" (December, 1966). Reprint. Westways Dixon, Wilfrid, and Massey, Frank J . , Jr. Introduction to Statistical Analysis. Second edition. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1957. Dunlap and Associates, Inc. Driver Education and Training Final Report. 1968. Dunn, Leroy W. "Motorcycle Driving Should Be Taught in Driver Education Courses." Traffic Safety, LXVIII (July, 1968), 26-27. _________. "Teach Them to Ride." Safety, III, No. (March-April, 1967), 16-19. 2 Durbin, Samuel S. "Emotions and Traffic Accidents— A Psychologist Looks at the Problem of Highway Safety." Traffic Safety Research Review, V (June, 1961),7,8. Ellison, Anthony L. "The Motorcycle Problem." Address given at the Southern Safety Conference, Traffic Enforcement Section, Richmond, Virginia, March 6, 1967. Embree, George. "Color of Car Might Influence Crash Rate." Detroit Free P r e s s , September 18, 1964. "Et Cetera, Et Cetera, Et Cetera." 1968), 2-31. Family Safety (Winter, Fisher, R. A . , and Yates, F. Statistical Tables for Biological, Agricultural, and Medical Research. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, Ltd. Gissane, W . , and Bull, J. "A Study of 183 Road Deaths in and Around Birmingham in 1960." British Medical Journal, I (June 17, 1961), 1716-20. 147 Goldstein, Leon M. "Research in vention: An Overview of the Public Service, U.S. Education and Welfare." Review, XX (June, 1967) , Traffic Accident Pre­ Research Supported by Department of Health, Traffic Safety Research 5fS. Hakkinen, S. Young Age Groups in Traffic. Helsinki, Finland: Institute of Occupational Health, 19 66. Hanks, J. N . , and Folduary, L. A. "Analysis of Age and Experience of Drivers Involved in Accidents." Australian Road Research, II, No. 4 (1965), 53-66. Harano, Richard M . , and Peck, Raymond C. The California Motorcycle Study: Driver and Accident Character­ istics. California: California State Department of Motor Vehicles, Division of Administration, July, 1968. Hawaii Department of Transportation. Hawaii Major Traffic Accidents Summary and Analysis. Hawaii: Depart­ ment of Transportation, 1969. Illinois Department of Public Works and Buildings. Illi­ nois Motor Vehicle Traffic Accident Facts 19 69. Springfield: Department of Public Works and Buildings, 1969. Illinois State Division of Highways. The Motorcycle in Traffic Accidents, Illinois 1966. Springfield: Illinois State Division of Highways, Bureau of Traffic, May, 19 67. International Association for Accident and Traffic Medicine. Proceedings of the Second Congress. N.P.: The Association, 1966. "Invisible Man." Air Force Driver (April, 1969), 10-15. Jacobs, Herbert H . , et a l . Behavioral Approaches to Accident Research. New York: Association for the Aid to Crippled Children, 1961. Jeffcoate, G. O. Relative Accident Rates for Different Types of Vehicles Involved in Pedestrian Accidents in Built-up Areas on Week D a y s . Crowthorne, Engl and: Road Research Laboratory, July, 1957. Jeffcoate, G. O . , mation on Reference England: graphed . and Garwood, F. "A Review of Infor­ Motorcycle Accidents with Special to Age of Motorcyclists." Crowthorne, Road Research Laboratory, 1956. Mimeo­ 148 Johnson, Duane R. "A Case Study of Motorcycle Accidents in Three Illinois Counties." Unpublished Ed.D. Dissertation, Michigan State University, East Lansing, 1968. Kaestner, Noel F. Motorcycle Accident Study, January 1 to July 31, 1963. Salem, Oregon: Department of Motor Vehicles, 1963. Klein, David. "A Reappraisal of the Violation and Acci­ dent Data on Teen-Aged Drivers." Traffic Quarterly, XX (October, 1966), 508. Lehmann, K. "Research into Causes of Road Accidents." Australian Road Research, I, No. 4 (1962), 46-47. Lincoln, Nebraska Police Department. Lincoln, Nebraska. Lincoln: 1967. Annual Report 19 67, Police Department, Lorenz, Francis S. "Fatal Motorcycle Accidents." Un­ published report delivered to the Governor's Official Traffic Safety Coordinating Committee. Springfield, Illinois, November 16, 1966. Los Angeles County. "A Survey on Motorcycles Involved in Traffic Accidents." Unpublished report. Los Angeles, 1965. Majid, Beth. "Danger Rides Two Wheels." XXXVIII (September, 1963), 684. Parents M a gazine, Margroff, D. A Motorcycle Accident Study. Sacramento: California Highway Patrol, January, 1968. McDole, T. L. Motorcycles: Random Particles in the Traffic Stream. Ann Arbor: Highway Safety Research Institute, Systems Analysis Group, December, 1970. "Meeting the Motorcycle Menace." Journal of American Insurance, XLIV (April, 1967) , 24". Michigan State Police. Michigan Motorcycle and Motor Scooter Data, 1962-19661 East Lansing: Michigan State Police, 1967. Miller, D. M. Driving in the Two-Wheeled World. California: American Honda Motor Company, Inc., 1968. 149 Ministry of Transport. Report of the Working Party on the Training of Learner Motor Cyclists. London: Ministry of Transport, 1965. "Motor Vehicle Safety Study 108: Lamps Reflection Devices, Passenger Vehicles." Federal Register (February 15, 1968), 2993-94. Motorcycle Accident Facts. Patr o l , 1967. Olympia: Washington State Motorcycle Accident Survey. Sacramento: Highway Patrol, 1970. California Motorcycle Accidents in North Carolina. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center, February, 1967. Motorcycle Accidents in Washington, 1964. Olympia: Washington State Patrol Accident Records Division, 1964. "Motorcycling Licensing Procedures Vary Opinion Survey Reveals." AAMVA Bulletin (June, 19 66), 4. "Motorcycling's Hidden Hazzards." 1969) , 35-37. Motorcyclist (January, Munden, J. M. "The Variation of Motorcycle Accident Rates with Age of Rider and Size and Age of Machine." International Road Safety and Traffic Review, XII, No. 1 (1964), 12-16. Munro, Stuart. "The Deadliest Vehemence." Paper on Motorcycle Safety, Ottawa Safety Council. Ottawa, Canada, 1967. Mimeographed. National Safety Council. Accident Facts. National Safety Council, 1972. Chicago: "New Legislative Safety Measures Signed as Death Toll Rises in Wisconsin." Wisconsin Traffic Safety Reporter (January, 1968), 1-2. New South Wales Road Safety Council. Annual Report, Road Safety Council of New South Wales, 1967-68. New South Wales: Road Safety Council, 196 8. New York State Department of Motor Vehicles. Accident Facts 1967 and Trends and Changes in the First Six Months of 1968. New York: State Department of Motor Vehicles, 1968. 150 New York State Joint Legislative Committee. Joint Legislative Committee on Motor Traffic and Highway Safety l£t>7-68. State: Joint Legislative Committee, New York state Vehicle New York 1968. North Dakota State Highway Department. North Dakota Traffic Accident Facts and Statistical Report 1968. North Dakota: State Highway Department, 1969. O'Mara, John J. "Motorcycle Accidents— An Epidemic." Paper read before Highway Safety Research Board, National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council. Washington, D.C., January 18, 1967. Ontario Department of Transport. Motorcycle Accidents in Toronto, An Analysis. Toronto: Department of Transport, 1965. Ontario Highway Traffic Collisions, 1968. Ontario: Department of Transport, 1969. Pennsylvania Department of Highways. Traffic Accident Statistical Summary of Pennsylvania 19 68. Pennsyl­ vania: Department of Highways, 1969. Pike, D. F. B. Accidents Resulting in Injuries to Army Motorcyclists. London: HerMaj e s t y 1s Stationery Office, I9T 9T "Problems Raised by the Development of Two-Wheeled Traffic. Question 3. Theme II: All Purpose Roads and Streets." International Study Week in Traffic Engineering. N.P.: Fourth, World Touring and Automobile Organization, 19 58. Preston, Caroline E . , and Harris, Stanley. "Psychology of Drivers in Traffic Accidents." Journal o f . Applied Psychology, XLIX (1965), 284. Public Health Service. Motorcycles in the United States: Popularity, Ac cictents, Injury Control. Cincinnati, Ohio: Public Health Service, Injury Control Pro­ gram, 1967. Quint, J. V. Motorcycle Accident Fatalities Increasing. New York: Metropolitan LTfe Insurance C o m p a n y , 1967. Royal Ulster Constabulary. Death and Injury Road Accidents in Northern Ireland 196 8 . Northern Ireland: Royal Ulster Constabulary, 1969. 151 "Rules of the Road Revised 1968." Traffic Laws Commen­ tary (October 31, 1968) , 1-43. "SAE Technical Reports Referenced in Motor Vehicle Safety Studies." Safety Automotive Engineers (December, 1968), 1-5. "Safety Group Demands Safer Conditions for Motorcycle Use." Medical Tribune and Medical N e w s , VII (November' 30, 1966) , 1^ Smeed, R. J. "Methods Available to Reduce the Numbers of Road Casualities." International Road Safety and Traffic Review, XIII (Autumn, 1964), 10. Snively, George G. Statement for National Commission on Product Safety. N"I P . : Snell Memorial Foundation, 1969. State Highway Commission. Summary of Motor Vehicle Acci­ dents Involving Motorcycles ^ 1966. Topeka, Kansas: State Highway Commission, 19 67. "Technical Reports Reprints." (1969), 1-5. Society Automotive Engineers "The Economic Costs of Motor Vehicle Accidents of Differ­ ent Types." Public R o ads, XXX (June, 1958), 42. Timberlake, W. E. "The Motorcycle Rider in Traffic." Traffic Digest and Review, XV, No. 1 (January, 19 67), 3-V. "Too Young to Scoot?" N e wsweek, August 25, 19 58, p. 18. Tooley, R. W. "The Case for Crash Helmets for Motor­ cyclists." Traffic Injury Research Foundation of Canada (196 5T1 1-4". Traffic Safety Association of Detroit. Annual Report for 1968. Detroit: Traffic Safety Association, 1969. Turfboer, Robert. "Do People Really Drive as They Live?" Traffic Quarterly, XXI (January, 1967), 101, 103, 105, 108. "Two-Wheeled Trouble." Journal of American Insurance, XL (September, 196 4), 23. Universal Underwriters Insurance Company. "Facts on Cycle Safety That Can Help You Sell." Talk delivered at Yamaha Dealer Schools, Kansas City, Missouri, 1967. 152 U. S. Bureau of Railroad Safety. Rail Highway Grade Crossing Accidents for Year Ended December 3 1 , 1968. Washington , D.C. : U .s'. Bureau of Railroad Safety. U. S. Department of Commerce. Draft Highway Safety Pro­ gram Standard No. 4.4.3— Motorcycle Safety. Washington, D.C.: National Highway Safety Bureau, February, 19 67. U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. "Exploratory Meeting on Motorcycle Safety Edu­ cation." Washington, 19 66. Mimeographed. ________ . Motorcycles in the United States— Popularity, Accidents, Injury Control. Washington, D . C . : Government Printing Office, 1966. ________ . Report of the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Traffic Safety. Washington7 D 7 c . : Government Printing O f f i c e , 1968. U. S. Department of Motor Vehicles. Motorcycle Riders Guide. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Motor Vehicles. U. S. Department of Transportation. Administration of Highway Safety Act of 1966 for January 1, 1968 to December 31, 1968. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Depart­ ment of Transportation, 19 69. Waller, P. F . ; Barry, Patricia z.; and Rouse, W. S. Motorcycles. I. Estimated Mileage and Its Parameters. Chapel Hill: North Carolina Uni­ versity Highway Safety Research Center, 1968. Waller, Patricia F.; Reinfurt, D. W . ; Reifler, C. B . ? and Koch, G. G. Motorcycles Versus Automobiles: How Their Owners Differ. Chapel H i l l : North Carolina'University Highway Safety Research Center, 1969. Washington State Patrol. Summary of Motorcycle Accidents Occurring in the Rural Areas of Washington, 1964. Olympia: Washington State Patrol, 1965. Summary of Motorcycle Accidents Occurring in the Rural Areas of Washington 1965. Olympia: Washington State Patrol, 1966. Washington State Traffic Accident Facts, 19 67. Olympia: Washington State Patrol, 196157 153 Welgemead, P. J. Aspects of Ownership and Use of Motor Vehicles in South Africa^ South Africa: Stettenbosch University, 1967. Wisconsin Department of Transportation. Wisconsin Acci­ dent Facts for 1968. Wisconsin: Department of Transportation, 1969. Wisconsin Motor Vehicle Department. "Summary— Motorcycle Safety Conference." Unpublished report of con­ ference. Madison, February 15, 1966. Mimeographed. Wyoming State Highway Department. Traffic Accident Facts 1968. Wyoming: State Highway Department, 1968. APPENDICES APPENDIX A PARTICIPATING POLICE AGENCIES APPENDIX A PARTICIPATING POLICE AGENCIES Delhi Township Police Department East Lansing Police Department Ingham County Sheriff's Department Lansing Police Department Lansing Township Police Department Leslie Police Department Mason Police Department Meridian Township Police Department Michigan State Police Department Michigan State University Department of Public Safety Williamston Police Department 154 APPENDIX B PERSONAL INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE APPENDIX B PERSONAL INTERVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE Statement: To identify those characteristics which will help informing a more complete profile of motorcycle operators, who have been involved in accidents, as they pertain to the operator, environment, experience, and educational needs. M______ F_____ 1. Sex: 2. Age:__ _____ 3. How far did you go in school? Junior High ______ Senior High Graduate School _____ 4. What is your occupation?____________________________ 5. What date did the accident occur?__________________ 6. What amount in dollars was the medical cost of the motorcycle accident in which you were involved? $_______________________ 7. How much experience in riding a motorcycle did you have prior to your accident? Years_____ Months___ 8. How many hours do you generally ride a motorcycle per week? _____ 0-5 6-10 11-15 16-20 Over- 2 0 9. Do you ride a motorcycle every 10. What time of the 8-12 A.M. 8-12 P.M. Elementary_____ College _____ day?___ ___ Yes day do you usually 12-4 P.M. 12-8 A.M. 155 ride? 408P.M. No 156 11. W h a t time of the d ay did your accident occur? 12. For what primary purpose do you use your motorcycle? _____ Recreation Racing Work 13. What days of the week do you do most of your riding? _____ Sunday Monday ____ Tuesday ___Wednesday _______Thursday ______Friday _____ Saturday 14. What date did you first ride a motorcycle?___________ 15. How long had you been riding at the time of your accident? _____ 0-2 hrs. _____ 3-4 hrs. _____ 5-6 hrs. 6-8 hrs. Over 8 hrs. 16. In what kind of locality did your accident occur? _____ Industrial Shopping or Business School Residential Rural 17. Do you usually ride your motorcycle in the county of your residence? _____ Yes No 18. Is this the first time you have ridden your motor­ cycle in the area where the accident happened? Yes No 19. How often did you ride on the road on which the accident occurred? every day twice a week _____ once a week _____ once a month every few months never other 20. At the time your accident occurred, on what type of road were you riding? _____ one driving lane _____ divided roadway _____ two driving lanes______ _____ limited access _____ three driving lanes _____ one-way street _____ four driving lanes _____ unpaved, any width 21. What was the type of road surface at the location of the accident? Asphalt _____ Concrete _____ Gravel D irt 22. What was the vertical contour of the road at the location of the accident? _____ level _____ slight grade ____ steep grade hill crest ______ dip 23. What was the horizontal contour of the road at the location of the accident? _____ Straight _____ Slight curve ____ Sharp curve _____ Other 157 24. What was the highway condition just before the accident happened? crowned road chuck holes _____ "washboard" other 25. What were the light conditions at the time of your accident? _____ daylight _____ darkness dawn _____ dusk 26. What were the weather conditions at the time of your accident? _____ clear cloudy rain _____ snow _____ fog _____ other 27. What was the condition ofthe road surface time of your accident? ___ dry _____ wet _____ snowy or icy __________other 28. Were you riding with your headlight on of the accident? Yes No 29. Was your visibility reduced in any way just before the accident occurred? Yes No 30. Was there a lack of appropriate signs, signals, or highway markings just before the accident occurred? Yes No 31. Was there any distraction(s) that you recall just before the accident occurred? Yes No 32. What did you do to avoid the accident when you realized you were in an emergency situation? 33. Do you feel this action helped reduce the severity of the accident? Yes No 34. Did anything happen that upset, worried, or bothered you on this trip? _____ Yes _____ No 35. What were you thinking about just before the acci­ dent occurred? 36. Where did your trip originate? other 37. What was your destination? other at the at the time _____ work _____ work home home 158 38. Are you riding any differently as a result of this accident? Yes In what way? No 39. Was there anything mechanically wrong with the motor­ cycle that you feel helped cause the accident? _____ Yes Explain:______________________________________ No 40. Briefly describe the major causes of your accident. 41. Did you have beer, wine, whiskey, or other alcoholic beverages within six hours before the accident? Yes No How much? 42. Had you been taking any type of drugs within 24 hours No of the accident? _____ Yes What were they? ___________ ___________________________ Did it have anything to do with the accident? Yes No 43. How many hours of instruction did you receive before riding the motorcycle by yourself? _____ none _____ 1 hr. 2 hrs. 3 hrs. _____ 4 hrs. _____ 5 hrs. 6 hrs. over 6 hrs. 44. What kind of instruction did you receive? _____ Verbal _____ Behind-the-wheel Explain:_______________________ _____ Not Applicable None 45. Who gave you the instruction? D ealer Parent _____ Friend D river Education Pro­ gram _____ Local Safety CouncTT Not available None 46. Did you successfully complete a high school driver education program? Yes When? No 159 47. If you successfully completed a high school driver education program, how much time in hours was spent on motorcycle safety education? _____ Hours 48. Are you familiar with the Michigan law pertaining to No motorcycles? _____ Yes 49. Did you have insurance coverage on your motorcycle? Yes No 50. Were you wearing any safety protective equipment? _____ helmet _____ goggles clothing none 51. Did you take a special motorcycle operator's license exam? Yes No 52. Was this your own motorcycle? _____ Yes _____ No If no, how many times had you ridden it before the accident?____________ 53. Were you charged with a violation in connection with the accident? Yes What? No 54. What advice do you have for others to prevent this type of accident? APPENDIX C LETTER OF INTRODUCTION M I C H I G A N STATE U N I V E R S I T Y bast lansing - Michigan a B8» COLLEGE O F EDUCATION • ERICKSON HALL Dear As a doctoral candidate at Michigan State University, I am currently conducting a research project concerned with motorcycle accidents that occurred in Ingham County during 1971. You have been randomly selected for this study. I would appreciate it very much if I could have approximately fifteen (15) minutes of your time to ask you a few questions concerning the accident in which you were involved. The information which I obtain from you during this inter­ view will be used for educational purposes only and will be held in strict confidence. I will be contacting you by phone in the near future to set up a time and place that would be convenient for you so that I may be able to obtain this information. Your cooperation and participation in this research project will be greatly appreciated. Sincerely yours, Frank C. Young Doctoral Candidate Michigan State University 160