Citation

Rundmo T. Safety Sci. 2000; 34(1-3): 47-59.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2000, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

unavailable

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

The aims of this paper are to test mental images of risk and to present some results of a survey of safety climate, employee attitudes, risk perception and behaviour among employees within the industrial company Norsk Hydro. Two mental images were tested. They are both based on the assumption that it is possible to make a distinction between cognitive and affective processes involved in risk perception. The first model was the 'rationalistic' approach, which assumes that the affective component of risk perception is influenced by cognitive judgements. The justification for the second model is found in Zajonc's [Zajonc, R.B., 1980. Feeling and thinking. Preferences need no inferences. American Psychologist 35 (2), 151-175] conclusion that emotions are precognitive. In this model, entitled the 'mental imagery' approach, emotion is seen as the driving force affecting cognition of risk and safety. Employees at 13 plants have answered a self-completion questionnaire. The plants belonged to the agricultural, aluminium, magnesium and petrochemical divisions within Norsk Hydro. A total of 731 respondents replied to the questionnaire. The mental imagery approach was somewhat better fitted to the data than a rationalistic approach. Safety climate and employee attitudes towards safety and accident prevention contributed significantly to the variance in employee occupational risk behaviour. Worry and the extent to which the employee felt safe/unsafe was the most important predictor for the cognitive judgement of risk. Acceptability of rule violations seemed to be the most important predictor of behaviour, probably because acceptability also affected how often the respondents took chances and broke safety rules.