Which signal modalities do cyclists prefer based on experiences in road traffic?

Figures & data

Table 1. Questionnaire and answers.

	Visual signal	Auditory signal	Vibro-tactile signal	None
Perception related
1a Did you perceive any signal more frequently during the cycling course?	4	31	21	16
1b Did you perceive some signal faster than others?	0	51	29	2
1c Is any signal type experienced as distracting?	25	1	5	28
1d Did you experience some signals as being particularly urgent?	3	39	16	6
1e Which signals would you perceive when cycling on your regularly cycled routes?	7	47	46	0
Signal rating related
2a Which signal is the best signal?*	1	32	22	0
2b Which signals would you choose as a warning signal?	2	48	20	0
2c Would you be uncomfortable if your bike emitted these signals?	3	20	3	31

Answers to questions related to perception of different signals during the cycling and to preferences of signal types in particular as warnings.

* Only one answer possible

Table 2. Comfort rating of the signals.

	Frequency of rating level
Signal	1 – comfortable	2	3	4	5	6 – uncomfortable	Mdn
Visual	4	10	15	20	5	1	3
Auditory	16	20	7	5	6	1	2
Vibro-tactile	15	22	8	7	3	0	2

Rating of different signal types regarding comfort. Question: Please rate the signals from comfortable (1) to uncomfortable (6)

Table 3. Response rates and signal preference.

		Signal type responded to the most (objective)
		Visual (n = 2)	Auditory (n = 30)	Vibro-tactile (n = 5)	Visual and auditory (n = 2)	Auditory and vibro-tactile (n = 13)
1a Did you perceive any signal more frequently? (subjective)	Visual (n = 3)	0	1	0	1	1
	Auditory (n = 13)	1	11	0	0	1
	Vibro-tactile (n = 5)	0	1	1	1	2
	Auditory and vibro-tactile (n = 16)	1	9	2	0	4
	None perceived more frequent (n = 15)	0	8	2	0	5
2a Which signal is the best signal?	Visual (n = 1)	1	0	0	0	0
	Auditory (n = 29)	1	17	0	2	9
	Vibro-tactile (n = 22)	0	13	5	0	4

Answers to questionnaire about subjective perception frequency and best signal choice in relation to the objective response rate. Matches of response rate and subjective perception frequency or preference are printed bold.

Table 4. Results of logistic regression.

	B(SE)	OR	95% CI
Response rate to visual signal [%]	−0.00 (0.01)	.998	.968–1.027
Response rate to auditory signals [%]	−0.18 (0.08)*	.832	.690–.957
Response rate to vibro-tactile signals [%]	0.01 (0.03)	1.010	.951–1.079
Gender (0 – male, 1 – female)	−2.06 (1.04)*	.128	.012–.799
Age groups (0 – 18–25 years, … , 5 − 56–65 years)	−0.34 (0.40)	1.409	.646–3.224
Trip distance (0 – 0–5km, …, 5 – more than 30 km)	−0.59 (0.35)	.555	.260–1.056
Cycling frequency (0 – daily, …, 4 – 1–3 days per month)	0.32 (0.30)	1.373	.763–2.535
Regular route characteristics (0 – none, 1 – traffic, 2 – loud, 3 – bumpy, 4 – traffic and bumpy, 5 – traffic and loud, 6 – all)	0.19 (0.19)	1.210	.845–1.791

Odds ratio (OR) and confidence interval (CI) for choice of preferred signal between auditory (baseline in logistic regression) and vibro-tactile signal predicted by response rate and participant characteristics. Significance codes: ^*p ≤ .05.

Data availability statement

We do not have permission to share research data.