Oregon State University study shows that allowing cyclists to yield at stop signs does not increase danger | Safety relevant driver and bicyclist behaviors resulting from bicycling rolling stops observed in a networked driving and bicycling simulator

Highlight from the news report:

>The Oregon study says with proper education for both cyclists and drivers, Idaho stops do not lead either riders or motorists to act unsafely.
>
>One of the study’s authors said they wanted to look at how well rolling-stop laws work, in a change from other studies that have looked at crash-data analysis and why riders yield at stop signs rather than stop as per the law.
>
>”It required fully connecting two independent simulators, running subjects in pairs simultaneously and having each subject interacting with an avatar of the other in a shared virtual world,” said David Hurwitz, a transportation engineering professor, in a release about the study.
>
>Researchers observed 60 people paired off who went through 16 virtual interaction scenarios as either a cyclist or motorist, coming together at a four-way-stop intersection.
>
>They found that instead of drivers being aggressive toward cyclists who appeared to be breaking the law by rolling through, driving participants approached intersections either more slowly or at a similar pace after being educated about what bicycle rolling stops were.
>
>Cyclists, after also being taught about Idaho stops, preferred to yield rather than stop and went through intersections faster, meaning they spent less time in the intersection exposed to potential danger.
>
>…
>
>Hurwitz said the study’s findings suggest more work should be done by jurisdictions over the utility of rolling-stop laws.
>
>”This research gives decision-makers information to support prospective legislative policies, set up educational programs and design robust enforcement practices,” he said.

—

Link to research publication:

[Safety relevant driver and bicyclist behaviors resulting from bicycling rolling stops observed in a networked driving and bicycling simulator](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0968090X24002754)

Abstract:

>Bicycle Rolling Stop (BRS) laws refer to legislation that allows bicyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs. Many states have passed statutes or attempted to pass similar statutes with varying permissive actions for bicyclists in response to stop signs. Previous research has focused on crash data analysis and motivating factors of bicyclists performing a rolling stop when illegal under prevailing law. However, there is still no available research that evaluates the efficacy of BRS laws or analyzes the effect of BRS in states where it is permitted. To that end, this research used a networked driving and bicycling simulator experiment to evaluate drivers and bicyclists understanding of the BRS law. Sixty participants successfully completed a networked simulator experiment where a “live interaction” occurred at a stop-controlled intersection between a participant in the driving simulator and a participant in the bicycling simulator. Participants encountered 16 scenarios while riding or driving in the simulators. Time-space diagrams demonstrated that after receiving education related to the BRS law, bicyclists preferred to yield at stop signs and had a higher average speed through intersections. Driving participants’ trajectories showed that drivers approached intersections either slower or at a similar speed after education of the BRS law. Live interactions in the networked simulators validated results where bicycling participants interacted with virtually controlled passenger cars. The results from this method concluded that more outreach is needed with regard to BRS laws, and this research provides decision-makers with information to support future legislative policies, program educational initiatives, and design enforcement practices regarding BRS laws.

[removed]

There are a lot of scenarios in which a cyclist rolling through the stop sign can be beneficial both to safety and efficiency.

Let’s say a cyclist is approaching a stop sign and, to their left of right, a motorist is approaching a stop sign at the same intersection. The cyclist, in this scenario is going to reach the stop sign first which means they have right of way.

If that cyclist comes to a complete stop and then laboriously starts back up again, it puts them at *more* risk than had they simply rolled with their momentum through the stop.

The driver, even though they didn’t have right of way, might either roll the stop sign themselves rather than wait for the slower cyclist to get through the intersection or have to wait at the stop sign while the cyclist slowly accelerates through the intersection.

Anyway…there’s quite a few situations like this where it is advantageous to all involved for the cyclist to treat the stop sign like a yield.