Graph comparing road deaths versus number of cameras

daz · 26 Jan 2011 at 19:38

(from the economist article http://www.economist.com/blogs/dail...nd_road_safety?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/bl/chart_camera)

From here, you can see that there isn't much of a correlation at all.

Spamalot · 26 Jan 2011 at 19:53

That graph is a joke.

SlyReaper · 26 Jan 2011 at 19:56

I feel this is relevant.

Biohazard · 26 Jan 2011 at 20:07

What kind of pirates?

Ooooh aarrrrr!

zetec452 · 27 Jan 2011 at 01:41

Just one eye'd pirates.

.

Not seen a gatso type speed camera here. There are some cameras on traffic lights in bigger cities.

Mr Joshua · 27 Jan 2011 at 01:46

http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/ne...ham_drop_to_lowest_level_in_36_years/?ref=rss

There's only one fixed speed camera in the whole county too from what I remember.

bledd · 27 Jan 2011 at 07:59

Ignore the cameras part of that graph and it simply shows more developed countries at the lower end

Vonhelmet · 27 Jan 2011 at 08:48

Absolutely absurd. As said, that's just a graph of economic development against road deaths.

Cosimo · 27 Jan 2011 at 09:01

I see nothing but a set of random plots.

daz · 27 Jan 2011 at 09:50

vonhelmet said:
Absolutely absurd. As said, that's just a graph of economic development against road deaths.

No it's not - are you reading it correctly?

US, Spain, Canada, France, Sweden Australia, Norway, Germany have a fraction of the number of cameras we do, and yet we have a very similar number of road deaths. Canada and Australia we can probably discount due to lack of population compared with the size of their countries (i.e. they have lots of roads...), but Germany, France, Spain are all worthwhile comparisons.

Obviously you can also read from there that less developed countries have more dangerous roads (or that is what it suggests), but the main thing to read from the graph is that there is no correlation between the number of speed cameras on your roads and road safety.

bledd · 27 Jan 2011 at 09:56

That's what he's saying.. (the same as I said)

That graph doesn't 'prove' a thing, all it tells us is less economically developed countries have worse roads / cars

Malc · 27 Jan 2011 at 10:23

For the graph to be even slightly relevant it would have to be scaled for the amount of cars on the roads and the amount of people in the country.

It means absolutely nothing. There's not even a line of best fit or an R Squared value to show correlation.

daz · 27 Jan 2011 at 10:27

Malc said:
For the graph to be even slightly relevant it would have to be scaled for the amount of cars on the roads and the amount of people in the country.

It means absolutely nothing. There's not even a line of best fit or an R Squared value to show correlation.

Might want to read the article

Our chart shows that the effectiveness of traffic cameras is inconclusive, perhaps because many other factors contribute to road safety, such as population density, the condition of vehicles and roads, and other pedestrian-protection measures.

Malc · 27 Jan 2011 at 10:29

daz said:
Might want to read the article

Good point.

At least the Economist agrees with me (or I agree with the Economist, whichever takes your fancy).

ubersonic · 27 Jan 2011 at 10:45

My absolute favourite use of statistics was when the transport minister came on top gear and said something along the lines of "our data shows that since we introduced the cameras the has been a decrease in the rate of road deaths" well woo hoo, got anything to say the two are in any way linked? lol, good news people, since I started playing WoW road deaths have decreased, I rule!

neil-ste · 27 Jan 2011 at 11:23

Mr Joshua said:
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/ne...ham_drop_to_lowest_level_in_36_years/?ref=rss

There's only one fixed speed camera in the whole county too from what I remember.

As far as i'm aware there are no fixed speed cameras in Durham Constabulary's force area. Which is how it should be IMO.

monkey_boy · 27 Jan 2011 at 13:45

Surely the lack of population vs size of road network data means that you don't get any useful info from it?

Burnsy2023 · 27 Jan 2011 at 14:02

Correlation != causation.

Disco Boy · 27 Jan 2011 at 14:16

daz said:
http://files.upit.me/1296165466.gifg]

(from the economist article [url]http://www.economist.com/blogs/dailychart/2011/01/daily_chart_traffic_cameras_and_road_safety?fsrc=scn/fb/wl/bl/chart_camera[/url])

From here, you can see that there isn't much of a correlation at all.[/QUOTE]

Is it really necesaary for us to point out the many ways in which that graph is flawed or can we all just save ourselves the time and close the thread?

Mr Joshua · 27 Jan 2011 at 15:19

neil-ste said:
As far as i'm aware there are no fixed speed cameras in Durham Constabulary's force area. Which is how it should be IMO.

I was told that years ago but I managed to find a BBC news article that said there was one, if there is one I've no idea where it's located mind!

Perhaps it was removed as the article is from 2003.