











This phenomenon can explain why football players wearing helmets can be more prone to neck injuries; why pedestrians are at greater risk when ...
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Huius ego nunc auctoritatem sequens idem faciam. Sapiens autem semper beatus est et est aliquando in dolore; Nam, ut sint illa vendibiliora, haec uberiora certe sunt. Duo Reges: constructio interrete. Quia dolori non voluptas contraria est, sed doloris privatio. Itaque ab his ordiamur. Quae cum magnifice primo dici viderentur, considerata minus probabantur. Quibus natura iure responderit non esse verum aliunde finem beate vivendi, a se principia rei gerendae peti; Si enim ad populum me vocas, eum. Verba tu fingas et ea dicas, quae non sentias? Tum Torquatus: Prorsus, inquit, assentior; Piso igitur hoc modo, vir optimus tuique, ut scis, amantissimus. Quod quidem iam fit etiam in Academia.
Quae cum essent dicta, finem fecimus et ambulandi et disputandi. Itaque hic ipse iam pridem est reiectus; Idem iste, inquam, de voluptate quid sentit? Quae in controversiam veniunt, de iis, si placet, disseramus. Vitae autem degendae ratio maxime quidem illis placuit quieta. Audio equidem philosophi vocem, Epicure, sed quid tibi dicendum sit oblitus es. Cupiditates non Epicuri divisione finiebat, sed sua satietate. Atque his de rebus et splendida est eorum et illustris oratio.
Sed eum qui audiebant, quoad poterant, defendebant sententiam suam. Ita ne hoc quidem modo paria peccata sunt. Quae autem natura suae primae institutionis oblita est? Sed tamen intellego quid velit. Rationis enim perfectio est virtus; Maximas vero virtutes iacere omnis necesse est voluptate dominante.




- Expect less immediate positive impacts for new safety measures.
Understanding ...
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Quis istum dolorem timet? Graecis hoc modicum est: Leonidas, Epaminondas, tres aliqui aut quattuor; Non est enim vitium in oratione solum, sed etiam in moribus. Qui enim voluptatem ipsam contemnunt, iis licet dicere se acupenserem maenae non anteponere. Huius, Lyco, oratione locuples, rebus ipsis ielunior. Duo Reges: constructio interrete. Non autem hoc: igitur ne illud quidem. Modo etiam paulum ad dexteram de via declinavi, ut ad Pericli sepulcrum accederem.
Hic ambiguo ludimur. Nec tamen ullo modo summum pecudis bonum et hominis idem mihi videri potest. Dicet pro me ipsa virtus nec dubitabit isti vestro beato M. Graecum enim hunc versum nostis omnes-: Suavis laborum est praeteritorum memoria. Mihi vero, inquit, placet agi subtilius et, ut ipse dixisti, pressius. Nos vero, inquit ille; Nosti, credo, illud: Nemo pius est, qui pietatem-; Et non ex maxima parte de tota iudicabis?
Mihi quidem Antiochum, quem audis, satis belle videris attendere. Gloriosa ostentatio in constituendo summo bono. Roges enim Aristonem, bonane ei videantur haec: vacuitas doloris, divitiae, valitudo; Atqui iste locus est, Piso, tibi etiam atque etiam confirmandus, inquam; Universa enim illorum ratione cum tota vestra confligendum puto. Cur iustitia laudatur?
Peltzman’s work was critiqued in a paper two years after its publication. Leon Robertson’s paper entitled A Critical Analysis of Peltzman’s ‘The Effects of Automobile Safety Regulation’ broke down a number of statistical problems with Peltzman’s work, explaining that: “The variables used in Peltzman's analysis were reviewed. It was concluded that some of them were arbitrarily chosen, that some were correlated, and that important factors were omitted. This may cause spurious and biased correlations. Peltzman's time series regression equations were reconstructed and found unstable, which makes them useless for predictions which are one basis for Peltzman's conclusions.” For those of you unfamiliar with academic discourse, them’s fighting words!
That said, the principle behind Peltzman’s work has persisted and evidence seems to demonstrate the effect does occur but generally does not negate all benefits of safety initiatives. A 2006 Dutch paper conducted an empirical study of motor vehicle safety and found that behaviour change related to the Peltzman Effect reduced less than 50% of the overall benefits.
Seat belts.
This 1994 study of seat belt wearing explored behavioural adaptation by those starting to use seat belts and found that “beginning wearers (group iii) showed signs of continuing behavioral adaptation, in the form of increased speed and increased propensity for close following.”
Bike helmets.
Cycling UK has argued against the compulsory use of helmets, explaining: “Cycle helmets have in any case not been shown to be an effective way to reduce cyclists’ injury risks. Indeed they might even be counter-productive, by encouraging drivers or cyclists to behave less cautiously, and/or by increasing the risks of neck and other injuries. By deterring people from cycling, they may also reduce the benefits that cyclists gain from ‘safety in numbers’.”
Booths Rule #2.
Skydiving has become consistently safer over the last few decades thanks to a number of safety initiatives, some of them developed by skydiving enthusiast and inventor Bill Booth. However, Booth’s Rule #2 states, "the safer skydiving gear becomes, the more chances skydivers will take, in order to keep the fatality rate constant." Indeed, without the popularity of complex low to ground maneuvers and high speed canopies that allow for faster speeds, some claim that fatalities would be a fraction of what they were a few decades ago.
d
Sam Peltzman, an economist at the University of Chicago, first described this effect in 1975 in relation to the car safety entitled The Effects of Automobile Safety Regulation. In the study, he argued that the increase of safety regulations was offset by people’s behaviour creating no change in highway deaths. The results of his report have been criticised (see Limitations above), though the effect named after the work persists.

Oops, That’s Members’ Only!
Fortunately, it only costs US$5/month to Join ModelThinkers and access everything so that you can rapidly discover, learn, and apply the world’s most powerful ideas.
ModelThinkers membership at a glance:






“Yeah, we hate pop ups too. But we wanted to let you know that, with ModelThinkers, we’re making it easier for you to adapt, innovate and create value. We hope you’ll join us and the growing community of ModelThinkers today.”