Ancient wrote:Exactly how risk compensation effects the multiplicity of safety systems is still a matter for research, but the evidence is that mechanisms that people are informed of (such as the well-marketed safety systems in cars) have a stronger effect than those which people are only vaguely aware of (an example might be an improved road surface).
*This is the bit that most people just don't seem to 'get' about risk compensation - it is not necessarily a rational choice and we do not always decide to increase the risks, we sem to have a 'risk comfort' zone that moves when we feel the risk changes.
It does seem quite strange. I get the unconsciously part, but while I can imagine unconsciously risk compensating for real effects I can sense - e.g. in a modern, refined, very comfortable, noise-insulated car I might feel more cocooned from the outside world and so unconsciously might feel more immune from the dangers of the outside world - I think what you're talking about is different.
I haven't followed the links you've posted but it sounds like you're saying that people unconsciously risk compensate for safety systems they believe to be present rather than (or perhaps as well as) effects they can actually sense. So in order to get drivers to unconsciously risk compensate, you don't have to fit cars with airbags and ABS and ESP and stuff, you just have to tell drivers you've fitted them - is that it?