Mountain Biker Psychology

Biker Psychology

We often hear from those who ride mountain bikes that they are on the
trail for the same reasons that hikers, walkers and equestrians are.
Both formal studies and informal sources show that that is not
generally the case. Do this simple informal study yourself. Go to a
news stand and look at a copy of Sierra or Backpacker magazine. You
will find that there are photographs of nature that are devoid of
people. Now look at a copy of any of the top mountain biking
magazines. Almost every photograph will have at least one mountain
biker in it. In the five mountain bike magazines that we looked at for
the month of September 2002, we could find no photographs without
mountain bikers in them. That's probably because hikers are on the
trail to enjoy nature whereas mountain bikers are on the trail to
enjoy their sport. They are both enjoying the outdoors but they are
each there for different reasons. Neither way is the only way and
neither way is 'the' correct way but it does help us to understand the
source of some of the conflict.

As discussed elsewhere on this site off-road mountain biking is a
thrill sport comparable to downhill skiing, auto racing, skydiving or
skateboarding. There is a substantial literature on the psychology of
those who engage in such risky sports and we will briefly examine
those findings and how they apply to the current problems of conflicts
between mountain bikers and hikers on Santa Barbara front country
single-track trails.

Biochemical Differences Underlying the Personality Differences

In general, practitioners of such thrill sports score much higher on
indices which measure such things as "sensation seeking" or seeking of
"arousal" as compared to control groups which pursue less risky sports
(1, 2, 7, 8, 11-14, 16-19, 22). This difference is also found in
mountain bikers, in particular as compared to other groups (1). These
"sensation seekers" as a group have substantially higher rates of
engagement in a whole range of more risky activities than do
individuals who are less inclined to seek thrills. These activities
include drug usage, law breaking, risky driving, heavier alcohol usage
and risky sex (6, 10, 19, 23). Again downhill riders have these
correlates as well (1). This does not mean that all members of the
group engage in these activities but that as a group there is
generally a higher rate than other populations. There are also
correlates of this in differences in the amount of the enzyme
Monoamine Oxidase in blood and tissue of these two groups with the
high sensation seekers having lower amounts. The mechanism proposed
has to do with the role of dopamine in the central nervous system (3,
20, 21, 23). There are also differences in the genes for dopamine
receptors between sensation seekers and others. Thus, there are
biochemical differences underlying the personality differences.
Participants in high risk sports also repress or underestimate the
degree of risk associated with their activities (17), clearly a
serious problem in shared use situations.

It may take a lot to get us hikers going, but once we do....

On an experiential level, the sensation seekers can handle high levels
of sensation resulting in high levels of arousal from their activities
without reaching incapacitating levels of anxiety (1, 20, 23) and
readily become bored in the absence of novelty and sensation. The low
sensation seekers, in contrast, much more readily experience fear as a
result of high levels of stimulation. Thus, there are differences in
the personalities of mountain bikers and hikers that are at the root
of their conflicts. That is these very different personalities view
the world differently and respond to it differently. As a result, they
seek very different experiences in their recreation. This difference
leads to the asymmetry which is commonly observed that hikers are much
more upset by the presence of bikers than vice versa (4). It is
sometimes assumed that those who participate in both sports can speak
for hikers, however, this is not necessarily so because these dual
sports participants are almost certainly higher in sensation seeking
than are hikers. This personality difference may also be related to
the aggressiveness with which bikers seek access to trails, construct
illegal trails, and are unwilling to give up trails (5, 15). Because
of their temperament, hikers are also much more reluctant to press
their concerns.

The off-road mountain bikers are seeking a highly stimulating
experience in mountain biking on steep, narrow, rocky single-track
trails. This sort of thrilling and dangerous experience is
exhilarating to them and they can get a feeling of "flow" including
awareness of the natural world. To them, at most, hikers are
obstructions, like rocks in the trail, that must be avoided and are
sometimes in awkward places. They probably do not experience high
levels of additional arousal even from almost hitting a hiker, because
their level of arousal is already so high. While they are riding,
their level of arousal is so high and their speed sufficient that
detailed, fine-grained examination and appreciation of the environment
is impossible. The feeling of connection and intense awareness, which
some note, is on a coarse-grained scale resulting from the thrill of
traveling fast and surviving. This level of awareness is so removed
from considered reflection upon their environment that they may not
even notice the trail destruction that they cause on steep trails.
Because of this personality orientation they find it difficult to
understand why their presence can be so upsetting to hikers and
equestrians.

Whatever the hikers are seeking on the trails, it's certainly not
thrills and danger.

They often are seeking the opposite in fact, an environment with
solitude, free of the arousing stimuli of our everyday world. Because
of their physiological difference, the hikers are typically startled
by the sudden appearance of a mountain bike and take some time to
recover a non-aroused state. This response is exacerbated in those who
have had narrow escapes with mountain bikes. This asymmetry of
responses means that the hikers are much more upset with the presence
of bicyclists than the bicyclists are with hikers (4). The hikers also
have good reason to be concerned for their safety, because people have
been killed by being hit by mountain bikes at speeds less than 10 mph
(9) and yet 15mph is generally accepted as OK among the bikers and
that speed is often exceeded by the more skilled.

This conflict between cyclists and hikers is based not on a lack of
acceptance of differences between people (social values) but rather
upon actual interference (interpersonal conflict or goal interference)
with the desired recreational experiences(4). In general separation of
activities is appropriate to resolve interpersonal conflict among
users while education is less relevant than it would be if the problem
were social conflict (4).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Bibliography

1. Anstiss, B. 1998. The efficacy of sensation seeking as a predictor
of multiple risk behaviours among a sample of New Zealand mountain
bikers. Master of Arts. Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand.
2. Apter, M. J. 1992. The dangerous edge: the psychology of
excitement. Macmillan, New York.
3. Calhoon, L. L. 1988. Explorations into the biochemistry of
sensation seeking. Personality & Individual Differences 9:941–949.
4. Carothers, P., J. J. Vaske, and M. P. Donnelly. 2001. Social Values
versus Interpersonal Conflict among Hikers and Mountain Bikers.
Leisure Sciences 23:47-61.
5. Chavez, D. J. 1996. Mountain biking: Issues and actions for USDA
Forest Service managers. Report PSW-RP-226.
6. Cooper, M. L., V. B. Agocha, and M. S. Sheldon. 2000. A
motivational perspective on risky behaviors: The role of personality
and affect regulatory processes. Journal of Personality 68:1059–1088.
7. Duroy, L. C. 2002. A comparison of sensation-seeking and
personality measures between road cyclists and mountain bikers.
8. Durtschi, S. K. 1999. Emotions and cognitions of athletes competing
in a high-risk sport. (mountain biking).
9. Graw, M., and H. G. König. 2002. Fatal pedestrian-bicycle
collisions. Forensic Science International 126:241–247.
10. Jonah, B. A. 1997. Sensation Seeking and risky driving: A review
and synthesis of the literature. Accid. Anal. and Prev. 29:651–665.
11. Laskar, A. H. 2000. Sensation Seeking Tendency in Mountain
Climbers. iuniverse.com, Lincoln, NE.
12. Potgieter, J., and F. Bisschoff. 1990. Sensation seeking among
medium- and low-risk sports participants. Perceptual & Motor Skills
71:1203–1206.
13. Rossi, B., and L. Cereatti. 1993. The sensation seeking in
mountain athletes as assessed by Zuckerman's Sensation Seeking Scale.
International Journal of Sport Psychology 24:417–431.
14. Rowland, G. L., R. E. Franken, and K. Harrison. 1986. Sensation
seeking and participation in sporting activities. Journal of Sport
Psychology 30B:12–220.
15. Schuett, M. A. 1997. State park directors' perceptions of mountain
biking. Environmental Management 21:239–246.
16. Shoham, A., G. M. Rose, and L. R. Kahle. 1998. Marketing of Risky
Sports: From Intention to Action. Journal of the Academy of Marketing
Science 26:307–321.
17. Slanger, E., and K. E. Rudestam. 1997. Motivation and
disinhibition in high risk sports: sensation seeking and
self-efficacy. Journal of Research in Personality 31:355–374.
18. Vealey, R. S. 2002. Individual differences and sport behavior, p.
39–82. In T. Horn (ed.), Advances in Sport Psychology, 2nd ed. Human
Kinetics, Champaign, Il.
19. Zuckerman, M. 2000. Are You a Risk Taker? Psychology Today.
20. Zuckerman, M. 1994. Behavioral Expressions and Biosocial Bases of
Sensation Seeking. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
21. Zuckerman, M. 1990. The Psychophysiology of Sensation Seeking.
Journal of Personality 58:313–345.
22. Zuckerman, M. 1983. Sensation Seeking and Sports. Person. individ.
Diff. 4:285–293.
23. Zuckerman, M., and D. M. Kuhleman. 2000. Personality and
Risk-Taking: Common Biosocial Factors. Journal of Personality
68:999-1029.
===
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

eom

eom

eom

Hey Mike - my god you are an idiot - mountain bikers are acoholics,
drug users and practice risky sex - and you have so-called references
to that - what an ass - references to other dweeb hikers like you - I
bet you are a totally boring person. I montain bike for exercise and
pleasure - but muncher!

Jimster wrote:
Hey Mike - my god you are an idiot - mountain bikers are acoholics,
drug users and practice risky sex - and you have so-called references
to that - what an ass - references to other dweeb hikers like you - I
bet you are a totally boring person. I montain bike for exercise and
pleasure - but muncher!

And you're an idiot too- cross posting replies to a troll. Mike is kill
filed- now so are you.

"PLONK"

--
-------------------------------------------------------
"Every day is Saturday when you're retired."

Bob Burns
Mill Hall PA
(email is a spamtrap)

On Feb 13, 9:41 am, "Jimster" wrote:
Hey Mike - my god you are an idiot - mountain bikers are acoholics,
drug users and practice risky sex - and you have so-called references
to that - what an ass - references to other dweeb hikers like you - I
bet you are a totally boring person. I montain bike for exercise and
pleasure - but muncher!

you forgot to mention devil worshippers