Citation

Camille Peres S, Hendricks JW. Safety Sci. 2024; 172: e106328.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2024, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.ssci.2023.106328

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Written procedures are often used as safety barriers in high-risk industries and to assist workers in executing tasks efficiently. However, there continue to be incidents where the issues with procedures are identified as a root cause. Dekkersuggests that a contribution to these issues with procedures is the expectation that workers will always strictly adhere to procedures (Safety Model 1) versus viewing performing a task using procedures as a complex cognitive process where procedures are a tool or a resource for action (Safety Model 2; Dekker, 2003). The current empirical study seeks to validate the Interactive Behavior Triad (IBT; Byrne et al., 2006) as a framework for facilitating Model1/Model 2 investigations. We argue thatprocedure useis interactive behavior involving attributes of the person, context, and task. A survey was administered to procedure users from high-risk industries (N = 174). Analyses demonstrated that variables from theIBT facets interact with one another. We found three 2-way interactions: for procedure deviations (quality × position experience); and for procedure use (task frequency × step signoff and procedure quality × position experience). There were two 3-way interactions associated with procedure use (task frequency × industry experience × safety climate and task frequency × industry experience × quality). There are important implications of using the IBT for investigating variables in these domains, i.e., there was either a weak or no main effect of safety climate for any of the criteria. However, safety climate had a larger impact when considering task frequency and industry experience. Other implications and future research are discussed.

Language: en

Keywords

Interactive behavior triad; Predictors of interactive behavior; Procedures; Safety Model 1 and 2