Where to Ride? An Explorative Study to Investigate Potential Risk Factors of Personal Mobility Accidents

Electric personal mobility device driver behaviors, their antecedents and consequences: A narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Electric personal mobility devices (ePMDs), as well as crashes involving ePMDs, have been on the rise all over the world. The objectives of this study were: (a) to summarize the literature based on a narrow definition of ePMD (excluding e-bikes) and (b) to sort out the results to fit into a psychological and behavioral framework. The available literature was sorted into three main categories: the behaviors of ePMD drivers, their antecedents, and their consequences.

METHOD

A narrative review of the literature was carried out in 101 documents published between January 2018 and July 2021.

RESULTS

Regarding behavioral antecedents, regulations vary from country to country. ePMDs were found to be used primarily by males under 40 years of age. We found no studies on driving skills or learning, driver education or training, or on the effect of health messages on attitudes and behavior. Regarding the main behaviors themselves, the drivers' reasons for focusing on ePMDs were our main focus (use for short distances and mainly for commuting, shopping, and leisure). Few of the studies we reviewed explored the interactions between ePMD drivers and other road users in natural or simulated environments, and the influence of road infrastructure on behavior has rarely been studied. Regarding health consequences, reported ePMD crashes resulted in serious head and limb injuries, especially head and leg fractures. The lack of personal protective equipment (e.g., a helmet) increased the severity of crashes. The conclusion highlights gaps in the literature from a psychological and behavioral point of view.

Differences in perception of safety in driving environment according to shared PMD user experience through multi-criteria analysis

A shared personal mobility device (PMD) is a transportation model that rents personal transportation devices, such as bicycles and kickboards, through a sharing platform. The use of shared PMD has increased, but related complaints and traffic accidents are doubling with it every year. This study applied an analytic network process (ANP) methodology for the multi-criteria analysis. A survey including normal citizens was conducted to evaluate the importance of safety regarding shared PMD experience. The evaluation factors differ according to the experience of using the shared PMD device, although 'driving continuity' and 'separation of sidewalks and roadways' were the most important. PMD users gave greater priority to 'removal of the road gap', 'traffic safety signs', 'dedicated parking area' and 'management of obstacles' compared to non-users. On the other hand, for non-PMD users, 'bicycle lane width', 'strengthening enforcement', and 'user safety education' were more important. The results showed that importance differed depending on the participant's experience of using a shared PMD or the lack of it. In the case of users, factors that have a direct effect on driving were prioritised, and in the case of non-users, auxiliary operations and management, such as crackdowns and education, were prioritised.