I’ve discussed previously the statistical analysis Dr. Samir Ahmed conducted to determine how many crashes would need to be studied to produce a solid motorcycle crash study. I had also passed along the Motorcycle Safety Foundation’s (MSF) response to my question about whether the analysis sways their thinking at all on providing the funds they have raised to conduct the study. That response was a bit brief and not totally clear, in my opinion, so I sent some follow-up questions. Here are the question I asked.

When I spoke with Tim Buche he told me that the MSF was open to new information and that once Dr. Ahmed had completed his statistical analysis that information would be presented to the board for consideration. Any decision to revise the previous decision would “depend on the quality of the work and the rationale.”

First, has the MSF board taken a look at Dr. Samir’s analysis? And considering your statement to me, does this mean the board questions the quality of the work and/or the rationale? If that is the case, can you tell me what it is about the quality of the work or the rationale that you find lacking?

Or is this still under consideration at this time, with the MSF simply not ready yet to make any statement in regard to the statistical analysis?

Well, I got a response and it was not very helpful, but it does seem to say that the MSF is unmoved and will not be opening its wallet for this study. Here’s the response.

Unfortunately, at this time the Motorcycle Safety Foundation has nothing additional to add beyond the statement we sent to you Monday, the information obtained during your interview with Tim Buche, and our original position paper.

That sounds pretty final. I guess we’ll get the best study $3 million will pay for, rather than a better study for $6 million to $7 million. I personally question the MSF’s decision but I’m sure they have their reasons. I’d just like a better idea what those reasons are, but they’re a private organization and don’t have to tell us.

Biker Quote for Today

Drop, Fall, and Down are 4-letter words

A statistical analysis appears to show that a new motorcycle crash study can produce statistically valid results even if the number of crashes studied is fewer than 900. That figure is important because about half the money earmarked for the study has been withheld by the Motorcycle Safety Foundation (MSF) because that organization’s board stated previously that it does not believe a study of fewer than 900 crashes can be adequate.

So now that Dr. Samir Ahmed, of Oklahoma State University, the head researcher on the project, has completed this analysis the obvious question is whether the MSF will change its mind. The initial response appears to be no.

The MSF sent me this response today in answer to my question about whether the board would be reconsidering its prior decision:

The MSF has not learned anything new that changes its position on this study because it still will not provide sufficient statistical significance of the OECD identified study variables. The study also will not produce results, in our estimation, that can be reliably correlated with studies in other countries, which is important to our multi-national member companies.

Because the response was so brief I emailed the MSF asking some follow-up questions, such as whether this statement comes after looking at Dr. Samir’s data and rejecting his conclusion, or whether the MSF board is still considering the data and is not yet ready to comment. I’ll let you know what I find.

Without the money pledged by MSF members and members of the Motorcycle Industry Council, the study can only afford to study 300 crashes. Dr. Ahmed intends to proceed with the study to whatever extent funding allows.

Recent from National Motorcycle Examiner
Rationale of motorcycle crash study statistical analysis explained

Biker Quote for Today

It takes 12 HP to ride around the world–the rest is wheelspin.