In article , Ace
wrote:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 16:07:53 +0000, Steve Haigh
wrote:
[snip]

May encourage a wearer to take more risks (I doubt this, but I've heard
it said).

As I understand it, it's something over which the wearer has little
control. If he feels less likely to be hurt, he will be inclined to go
faster, steeper or whatever. It would take a conscious effort to avoid
this risk-compensation, which is inherent to human nature.


Yes it is inherent in human nature. People make subjective assessments
of the risks which may not agree with an objective assessment. For
example as you improve the personal safety systems in a car, such as
seatbelts and airbags, then you often find that people are prepared to
risk more and bigger accidents. Similarly if you make them feel more at
risk by convincing them that an activity seems more dangerous than it
really is they will behave more cautiously.

The same action can have differing effects on different people. So for
example if you were to compel a group of people to wear a helmet, you
might find some will now take more risks because they feel protected by
the helmet, whereas others will perceive that the need for a helmet is
because there must be a greater risk of injury than they originally
thought and hence they would be dissuaded from taking risks.
Introduction of compulsory helmet usage for cycling has reduced the
numbers who cycle in some countries.

Mike URL:http://www.path.cam.ac.uk/~mrc7/
--
o/ \\ // |\ ,_ o Mike Clark
\__,\\ // __o | \ / /\, "A mountain climbing, cycling, skiing,
" || _`\,_ |__\ \ | immunology lecturer, antibody engineer and
` || (_)/ (_) | \corn computer user"