Full throttle: Are motorcyclists as risk-taking as we think?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Motorcycling, whether thought of as a leisure activity, hobby, or social activity, can add quality to one's life. Being a member of a motorcycle club may promote a sense of community, while motorcycling itself may increase feelings of awe and joy. When conceptualized as part of one's social identity, motorcycling tends to be associated with an unfavourable image or stereotype, wherein motorcyclists' personalities are characterized as rebellious, prone to risk-taking behaviour, and masculine (regardless of the motorcyclist's gender). The accuracy of this stereotype is unclear, particularly as perceived by non-motorcyclists, such as car drivers. Accordingly, the overall purpose of this exploratory study was to describe the personality profile of motorcyclists from a basic trait perspective (Big 5) and assess its congruence with non-motorcyclists' perceptions of the "typical" motorcyclist's personality. PARTICIPANTS AND PROCEDURE: = 182) collected information on personality traits (self-report or perceived), riding behaviour (motorcyclists only), and well-being. RESULTS: The results show that car drivers perceive motorcyclists to be more disinhibited, less open, more neurotic, less agreeable, and less conscientious than motorcyclists self-report. CONCLUSIONS: Car drivers' perceptions of motorcyclists seem to be more negative than their actual personalities, suggesting an unfavourable judgement of that community.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".