This photo from the report’s cover and text in the report imply that regular traffic stream bicyclists were examined, when in reality volunteers were used. Does this lack of integrity extend to other areas of the research?

Critique of Evaluation of Shared-Use Facilities For Bicycles and Motor Vehicles examines a 1996 monograph produced by the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center for the Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety Office of the Florida Department of Transportation. The monograph can be found HERE. (The link in my critique is incorrect. I cannot change it in my pdf.)

Evaluation of Shared-Use Facilities For Bicycles and Motor Vehicles overstates its value by claiming to be “comprehensive;” has flawed and misleading research methodology because predominantly volunteer subjects were used rather than traffic stream bicyclists as implied; uses sloppy wording that transposed two key independent variables, raising the issue of the possibility of erroneous calculations; and employs faulty and simplistic reasoning.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: