Citation

Cohen TN, Wiegmann DA, Shappell SA. Aerosp. Med. Hum. Perform. 2015; 86(8): 728-735.

Affiliation

Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach, FL, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2015, Aerospace Medical Association)

DOI

10.3357/AMHP.4218.2015

PMID

26387897

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This paper examines the reliability of the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) as tool for coding human error and contributing factors associated with accidents and incidents.

METHODS: A systematic review of articles published across a 13-yr period between 2001 and 2014 revealed a total of 14 peer-reviewed manuscripts that reported data concerning the reliability of HFACS.

RESULTS: Results revealed that the majority of these papers reported acceptable levels of interrater and intrarater reliability.

CONCLUSION: Reliability levels were higher with increased training and sample sizes. Likewise, when deviations from the original framework were minimized, reliability levels increased. Future applications of the framework should consider these factors to ensure the reliability and utility of HFACS as an accident analysis and classification tool. Cohen TN, Wiegmann DA, Shappell SA. Evaluating the reliability of the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2015; 86(8):728-735.

Language: en