Re: [Paddlewise] Kayaking safety

Dan wrote;

(SNIP)

>
>After reading this I went to his web site to read his book. It should be
>noted that he also provides examples of studies which do *not* show this
>(including two Canadian studies).  For example, he writes:
>
(SNIP of examples)

Yes, he did show examples where training did not have an adverse effect.
What one calls an attempt to show all sides of the issue.  Nevertheless his
conclusion is valid that training does not necessarily result in improved
safety. Keep in mind weare dealing with human behaviour which is an
enormous variable. The fact that some studies don't produce the the same
result may be due to the content of the education or the conduct of the
study. Dr. Wilde drew his conclusions from the preponderance of the
information.

>
>Clearly the evidence regarding the effect of training on accident rates
>is mixed. I am certainly not convinced that skill development in sea
>kayaking has a tendency to increase accident rates.  (Of course we would
>NOT expect it to decrease accident rates unless skilled paddlers have a
>lower risk target than unskilled paddlers, which is highly unlikely.)

I can see you aren't convincedf :-)
(SNIP)

>Correct me if I am mistaken, but you seem to be critical of this
>attitude, *regardless* of whether the person expressing it has correctly
>assessed the risk.  The attitude that "I am better therefore I can take
>more chances" is perfectly rational so long as the paddler does not
>underestimate the risk involved.  As Wilde points out, optimizing risk
>is very different from minimizing risk.  Skill development creates a
>safety "problem" only to the extent that the individual becomes
>overconfident.  The fact that skilled paddlers undertake greater
>challenges than less skilled paddlers is not by itself evidence of a
>safety problem.

You are most assuredly mistaken. My point has never been that one should
not undertake more training, develop more skills, or that the bar should
never be raised. My (and that of Dr. Wilde) point is that  perceived risk
and perceived safety must be appropriately evaluated for a net safety
improvement.  The goal (it seems to me) is to make sure that perceived
safety is lower than real safety and that perceived danger is greater than
real danger. The level at which this occurs is not necessarily important. A
highly skilled paddler in over his head is not better of than an unskilled
paddler in over his head to the same relative degree.

>Again, I want to emphasize that the type of training that John advocates
>is exactly what is needed to help prevent overconfidence, which *is* a
>safety problem. While I am not convinced that skill development leads to
>overconfidence as a general proposition, certainly there are some
>individual paddlers who become overconfident, precisely because
>they have not thought through the risk factors to which John refers in
>his post.

As can be seen, Dan and I agree on the fundmentals but not necessarily the
details. This is why these discussions are so valuable (to me at least)
since they reveal different attiutudes and approaches to the same problem.
Each time we discuss these issues (and we have many times) I learn more and
improve my understanding -hopefully.

Cheers,
John Winters
Redwing Designs
Specialists in Human Powered Watercraft
http://home.ican.net/~735769/

***************************************************************************
PaddleWise Paddling Mailing List
Submissions:     paddlewise_at_lists.intelenet.net
Subscriptions:   paddlewise-request_at_lists.intelenet.net
Website:         http://www.gasp-seakayak.net/paddlewise/
***************************************************************************