Can we expect humans to behave dramatically differently when on bikes versus in cars - and what is causing the difference in behavior?

"Young human males are more prone then females to take risks in relation to conflict" Fascinating tidbit from this article: "Females find risky situations more stressful then males do"
http://www.epjournal.net/filestore/ep062942.pdf

I would guess it is because males have more testosterone coursing through their blood stream then women and evolutionary survival of the species adaptation. Testosterone affects behavior. And, as TaoMom pointed out, women tend to have transportation responsibility for the children of a family - and will choose what is perceived to be safer given the opportunity for choice because as I just learned, risk stresses us out. Yes, some risk is perceived versus real - as someone points out the stady that seperated bike lanes aren't always safer - but if we feel safer we are less stressed.

Anyone who has spent time around teenage boys or young men just knows that males take risks more often then females - but it's interesting to try and understand why. Any biologists around or are we all transport policy and bike geeks?

Cheryl

we are city girls. we ride. we blog.
cant wait for these numbers to go way up high sisters, let's ride, more and more <3 I'm sure there are probably more, but that I know of-check out these bay area girlfriends:

http://changeyourliferideabike.blogspot.com/
http://calitexican.blogspot.com/
http://velovogue.blogspot.com/
http://wheelright.blogspot.com/
http://ridingpretty.blogspot.com/
http://www.flickr.com/people/plattyjo/
http://www.flickr.com/people/bicigirl/
http://www.flickr.com/people/rhondawinter/

SFMTA's 2008 SF State of Cycling Report relates intersection counts from summer 2008 which tallied 27% female cyclists, from 24% in 2007 and 25% in 2006. SFMTA's survey info published in the same report found females made up 23% of "frequent" cyclists (ride a bike 2 or more times/week) but 54% of "infrequent" riders.

http://sfmta.com/bike

SFBC's 2008 Report Card on Bicycling heard from 37% female respondents (essentially unchanged from 38% in 2006).

http://sfbike.org/?reportcard

Also, do see Mary Brown's 2002 work with the SFBC, a Low-Income Women and Bicycling survey focusing on the reasons why women use bicycles as transportation at far lower rates than men.

http://sfbike.org/?women

We really haven't got a current campaign on woman and bicycling, let alone a campaign dealing with low-income women, let me know if you want to take it on as an internship of some sort . . .

MC OConnor, I completely agree with you on the two final notes. Those are points that I stress when talking about cycling with non-cycling women. I often wear heels on my bike, but never if I have to walk or take public transit - ouch. And I feel way safer cycling alone at night than taking public transportation or walking - moving fast and staying out of reach of pedestrians, bushes, alleys, etc.

This whole discussion is so weird to me. I mean, I guess it's an important topic. But I'm not totally convinced. I don't understand why a woman would want to consistently walk or drive or take public transit to a workplace that is a bikable distance from home, nor do I understand why a man would prefer those modes to the bicycle. But I am biased because I love riding.

What I would like to see: less vehicular traffic, more cleaner-burning vehicles and more use of public and bike transit infrastructure. I don't really care all that much whether I see more female cyclists (and I am, for the record, female). That's not to say I don't want to see safe biking infrastructure and plenty of bike racks, etc. Those are important. But if more men use bikes than women when commuting...I guess I just don't see that as being a big issue.

Now, if a woman, or man, is fearful of riding in traffic, I think that's a shame. One should not be afraid to ride in traffic. One should try to get over that fear, in my opinion. Because I believe it's valuable to have different perspectives on public spaces. Riding a bike provides an important perspective on how things work, how traffic flows (or doesn't). It can make one a more cautious driver. It can make one a more defensive cyclist. It can make one a more aware pedestrian. Maybe we should just all swap out our conveyance of choice once in a while and get a new perspective.

If a woman, or a man, doesn't want to ride a bike to work because she or he doesn't want to get sweaty, fine. Who cares. That's your call. Take the bus or subway, or walk. Or carpool if you must. Or just get over it. For most people in most places, there are at least a few options.

Two final notes. It really is way easier, in my experience, to ride in high heels than to walk in them. When moving through the city, alone, late at night, I find that I feel much safer on a bike than on foot. (Especially a high-heeled foot.)

"In 1971, the California state government contracted with University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) for the design of bikeways. UCLA largely copied Dutch bicycle facilities practice (primarily sidepaths) to create their bikeway designs, but the derived designs were not made public. The California Statewide Bicycle Committee (CSBC) was created. Initially composed of representatives of governmental and motoring organisations. When John Forester, a cyclist representative, became a member he concluded that its real motivation for moving cyclists aside was the convenience of motorists, although the stated reason was the safety of cyclists. Serious safety issues were identified with the proposed designs. [ Forester, John (August 1994). Bicycle Transportation. MIT Press. pp. 24–25. ISBN 0-262-56079-8.]

For more information see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Segregated_cycle_facilities

It can't be overstated the enormous different safe bikeways make. Physically separated bike lanes would make it possible for all sorts of demographic groups beyond young men (women! kids! senior citizens!) to make biking a way of life.

Whenever I chance upon a traffic-free stretch of street (usually just by luck), I'm struck afresh at how delightful San Francisco would be for biking if there were no cars. I do have to say that when I have my daughter on the back of my bike, car drivers are generally nicer to me than they are to the average bicyclist.

I am very tired of young(er) male cyclists stating that physically separated bike lanes are not a good idea because of x, y, and z. What they really should say is that they don't feel they need separated bike lanes. I can only imagine how many women in my office would ride in to work if there were a safe and dignified way to get here by bike. Bike boulevard, physically seperated lanes, whatever - just not what we have right now.