Nuclear Engineering and Technology

  • 제53권5호
  • /
  • Pages.1454-1463
  • /
  • 2021
  • /
  • 1738-5733(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2234-358X(eISSN)
한국원자력학회 (Korean Nuclear Society)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Antecedents of self-reported safety behaviors among commissioning workers in nuclear power plants: The roles of demographics, personality traits and safety attitudes

  • Tao, Da (State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Power Safety Monitoring Technology and Equipment, China Nuclear Power Engineering Co., Ltd) ;
  • Liu, Zhaopeng (State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Power Safety Monitoring Technology and Equipment, China Nuclear Power Engineering Co., Ltd) ;
  • Diao, Xiaofeng (Institute of Human Factors and Ergonomics, College of Mechatronics and Control Engineering, Shenzhen University) ;
  • Tan, Haibo (State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Power Safety Monitoring Technology and Equipment, China Nuclear Power Engineering Co., Ltd) ;
  • Qu, Xingda (Institute of Human Factors and Ergonomics, College of Mechatronics and Control Engineering, Shenzhen University) ;
  • Zhang, Tingru (Institute of Human Factors and Ergonomics, College of Mechatronics and Control Engineering, Shenzhen University)
  • 투고 : 2020.05.28
  • 심사 : 2020.11.05
  • 발행 : 2021.05.25
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

Demographics, personality traits and attitudes are related to safety behaviors in varied workplaces, but their roles in nuclear power plants (NPPs) have not been fully understood. This study was conducted to explore the roles of a set of demographic, personality and attitudinal factors on self-reported safety behaviors (including safety participation and human errors) among NPP commissioning workers. Survey data were collected from 157 Chinese commissioning workers. Results showed that age and work experience were significantly associated with human errors, but not with safety participation. Neuroticism and conscientiousness were significantly related to human errors, while neuroticism, conscientiousness and agreeableness were significantly related to safety participation. Attitude towards questioning was observed as an antecedent of safety participation, and functioned as a mediating variable in the relation between conscientiousness and safety behaviors. The findings provide evidence-based implications on the design of diverse interventions and strategies for the promotion of safety behaviors in NPPs.

키워드

과제정보

This research was jointly funded by the Foundation of Shenzhen Science and Technology Committee (grant no. 20200813225029002), Humanity and Social Science Youth Foundation of Ministry of Education of China (grant no. 20YJCZH146), the Natural Science Foundation of Guangdong Province, China (grant no. 2019A1515010863), grants from State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Power Safety Monitoring Technology and Equipment of China (Grant No. 007-EC-B-2019-C83-P.S.20-01122) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 71801156).

참고문헌

  1. L.J. Kecklund, O. Svenson, Human errors and work performance in a nuclear power plant control room: associations with work-related factors and behavioral coping, Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 56 (1) (1997) 5-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0951-8320(96)00137-8
  2. J. Reason, Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents, Ashgate, Aldershot, 2016.
  3. l Zhang, M. Zhao, Statistics and analysis of WANO human factor events, Nucl. Power Eng. 14 (6) (2005) 565-571.
  4. S. Yang, G. Bo, L. Dan, Based on Human Behavior Process of Human Error Defensive Management Research for NPP, 2017 25th International Conference on Nuclear Engineering; July 2-6, 2017, American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, Shanghai, China, 2017.
  5. H.W.J.E. Hendrick, Ergonomics in organizational design and management, Ergonomics 34 (6) (1991) 743-756. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139108967348
  6. M.S. Christian, J.C. Bradley, J.C. Wallace, M.J. Burke, Workplace safety: a meta-analysis of the roles of person and situation factors, J. Appl. Psychol. 94 (5) (2009) 1103. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016172
  7. L. Hogberg, Root causes and impacts of severe accidents at large nuclear power plants, Ambio 42 (3) (2013) 267-284. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-013-0382-x
  8. S. Peltzman, The effects of automobile safety regulation, J. Polit. Econ. 83 (4) (1975) 677-725. https://doi.org/10.1086/260352
  9. Y. Feng, P. Wu, G. Ye, D. Zhao, Risk-compensation behaviors on construction sites: demographic and psychological determinants, J. Manag. Eng. 33 (4) (2017), 04017008. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)ME.1943-5479.0000520
  10. X. You, M. Ji, H. Han, The effects of risk perception and flight experience on airline pilots' locus of control with regard to safety operation behaviors, Accid. Anal. Prev. 57 (2013) 131-139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.03.036
  11. D. Tao, R. Zhang, X. Qu, The role of personality traits and driving experience in self-reported risky driving behaviors and accident risk among Chinese drivers, Accid. Anal. Prev. 99 (2017) 228-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.12.009
  12. S. Clarke, I.T. Robertson, A meta-analytic review of the Big Five personality factors and accident involvement in occupational and non-occupational settings, J. Occup. Organ. Psychol. 78 (3) (2005) 355-376. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317905X26183
  13. P.-L.P. Rau, P.-C. Liao, Z. Guo, J. Zheng, B. Jing, Personality factors and safety attitudes predict safety behaviour and accidents in elevator workers, Int. J. Occup. Saf. Ergon. (2018) 1-9.
  14. M. Guo, W. Wei, G. Liao, F. Chu, The impact of personality on driving safety among Chinese high-speed railway drivers, Accid. Anal. Prev. 92 (2016) 9-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.03.014
  15. L. Mallia, L. Lazuras, C. Violani, F. Lucidi, Crash risk and aberrant driving behaviors among bus drivers: the role of personality and attitudes towards traffic safety, Accid. Anal. Prev. 79 (2015) 145-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2015.03.034
  16. P. Ulleberg, T. Rundmo, Personality, attitudes and risk perception as predictors of risky driving behaviour among young drivers, Saf. Sci. 41 (5) (2003) 427-443. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7535(01)00077-7
  17. P.A. Cornelissen, J.J. Van Hoof, M.D.T. De Jong, Determinants of safety outcomes and performance: a systematic literature review of research in four high-risk industries, J. Saf. Res. 62 (2017) 127-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2017.06.009
  18. M. Pourmazaherian, S.M.S. Baqutayan, D. Idrus, The role of the big five personality factors on accident: a case of accidents in construction industries, J. Sci. Technol. Innovat. Pol. 3 (2) (2018) 46-55.
  19. P.S. Paul, J. Maiti, The synergic role of sociotechnical and personal characteristics on work injuries in mines, Ergonomics 51 (5) (2008) 737-767. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130701747483
  20. J. Zhang, W. Ding, Y. Li, C. Wu, Task complexity matters: the influence of trait mindfulness on task and safety performance of nuclear power plant operators, Pers. Indiv. Differ. 55 (4) (2013) 433-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.04.004
  21. A. Ohtsuru, K. Tanigawa, A. Kumagai, O. Niwa, N. Takamura, S. Midorikawa, et al., Nuclear disasters and health: lessons learned, challenges, and proposals, Lancet 386 (9992) (2015) 489-497. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60994-1
  22. B. Zerger, M. Noel, Nuclear power plant commissioning experience, Prog. Nucl. Energy 53 (6) (2011) 668-672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnucene.2011.04.010
  23. R. Mu, J. Zuo, X. Yuan, China's approach to nuclear safety-from the perspective of policy and institutional system, Energy Pol. 76 (2015) 161-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2014.11.009
  24. K.L. Ringenbach, R.R. Jacobs, Injuries and aging workers, J. Saf. Res. 26 (3) (1995) 169-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-4375(95)00015-I
  25. J. Nouri, A. Azadeh, I.M. Fam, The evaluation of safety behaviors in a gas treatment company in Iran, J. Loss Prev. Process. Ind. 21 (3) (2008) 319-325. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jlp.2007.11.006
  26. S.J. Butani, Relative risk analysis of injuries in coal mining by age and experience at present company, J. Occup. Accid. 10 (3) (1988) 209-216. https://doi.org/10.1016/0376-6349(88)90014-4
  27. O.-L. Siu, D.R. Phillips, T.-W. Leung, Age differences in safety attitudes and safety performance in Hong Kong construction workers, J. Saf. Res. 34 (2) (2003) 199-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-4375(02)00072-5
  28. D.A. Hennessy, D.L. Wiesenthal, Driving vengeance and willful violations: clustering of problem driving attitudes, J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 35 (1) (2005) 61-79. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2005.tb02093.x
  29. G. Zhao, C. Wu, R.J. Houston, W. Creager, The effects of binge drinking and socio-economic status on sober driving behavior, Traffic Inj. Prev. 11 (4) (2010) 342-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/15389581003789573
  30. C.S. Kao, W.H. Lai, T.F. Chuang, J.C. Lee, Safety culture factors, group differences, and risk perception in five petrochemical plants, Process Saf. Prog. 27 (2) (2008) 145-152. https://doi.org/10.1002/prs.10246
  31. M.R. Barrick, M.K. Mount, The big five personality dimensions and job performance: a meta-analysis, Person. Psychol. 44 (1) (1991) 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1991.tb00688.x
  32. P.T. Costa, R.R. MacCrae, Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) Professional Manual, Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa,FL, 1992.
  33. H. Eysenck, The personality of drivers and pedestrians, Med. Sci. Law 3 (1962) 416-423.
  34. H.-C. Seo, Y.-S. Lee, J.-J. Kim, N.-Y. Jee, Analyzing safety behaviors of temporary construction workers using structural equation modeling, Saf. Sci. 77 (2015) 160-168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2015.03.010
  35. T. Zhang, A.H.S. Chan, W. Zhang, Dimensions of driving anger and their relationships with aberrant driving, Accid. Anal. Prev. 81 (2015) 124-133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2015.05.005
  36. T. Zhang, A.H.S. Chan, The association between driving anger and driving outcomes: a meta-analysis of evidence from the past twenty years, Accid. Anal. Prev. 90 (2016) 50-62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2016.02.009
  37. Slavinskiene J, Zardeckaite-Matulaitiene K, Marksaityte R, Seibokaite L, Endriulaitiene A, Kaunas Univ T. Attitudes towards risky driving in Lithuanian traffic offenders: meaning of personality profile. Proceedings of the 20th International Scientific Conference Transport Means 2016. Transport Means - Proceedings of the International Conference2016. p. 495-498.
  38. F. Lucidi, L. Mallia, L. Lazuras, C. Violani, Personality and attitudes as predictors of risky driving among older drivers, Accid. Anal. Prev. 72 (2014) 318-324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2014.07.022
  39. D. Burkolter, A. Kluge, J. Sauer, S. Ritzmann, The predictive qualities of operator characteristics for process control performance: the influence of personality and cognitive variables, Ergonomics 52 (3) (2009) 302-311. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130802376067
  40. F. Chu, M. Guo, S. Liu, S. Chen, Work-family conflict, personality, and safety behaviors among high-speed railway drivers, J. Transport. Saf. Secur. (2019) 1-17.
  41. W. Arthur Jr., D. Doverspike, Predicting motor vehicle crash involvement from a personality measure and a driving knowledge test, J. Prev. Interv. Community 22 (1) (2001) 35-42. https://doi.org/10.1080/10852350109511209
  42. G. Matthews, Neuroticism from the Top Down: Psychophysiology and Negative Emotionality, on the Psychobiology of Personality: Essays in Honor of Marvin Zuckerman, 2004, pp. 249-266.
  43. M.P. Paulus, C. Rogalsky, A. Simmons, J.S. Feinstein, M.B. Stein, Increased activation in the right insula during risk-taking decision making is related to harm avoidance and neuroticism, Neuroimage 19 (4) (2003) 1439-1448. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1053-8119(03)00251-9
  44. B. Kirkcaldy, A. Furnham, Positive affectivity, psychological well-being, accident- and traffic-deaths and suicide: an international comparison, Stud. Psychol. 42 (1) (2000) 97-104.
  45. I. Ajzen, Attitudes, Personality, and Behavior, Dorsey, Chicago, IL, 2005.
  46. A.H. Eagly, S. Chaiken, The Psychology of Attitudes, Harcourt Brace Javanovich, Fort Worth, TX, 1993.
  47. I. Ajzen, From intentions to actions: a theory of planned behaviour, in: J. Kuhl, J. Beckman (Eds.), Action Control: from Cognition to Behaviour, Springer, Heidelberg, 1985.
  48. I. Ajzen, The theory of planned behavior, Organ. Behav. Hum. Decis. Process. 50 (1991) 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
  49. H. Iversen, Risk-taking attitudes and risky driving behaviour, Transport. Res. F Traffic Psychol. Behav. 7 (3) (2004) 135-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2003.11.003
  50. CGN, China general nuclear power group, Available from: http://en.cgnpc.com.cn/encgn/index.shtml, 2019.
  51. K.S. Taber, The use of Cronbach's alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education, Res. Sci. Educ. 48 (6) (2018) 1273-1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
  52. M. Wang, X. Dai, S. Yao, Development of the Chinese big five personality inventory (CBF-PI) III: psychometric properties of CBF-PI brief version, Chin. J. Clin. Psychol. 19 (2011) 454-457.
  53. L. Jiang, T.M. Probst, Transformational and passive leadership as cross-level moderators of the relationships between safety knowledge, safety motivation, and safety participation, J. Saf. Res. 57 (2016) 27-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2016.03.002
  54. A. Neal, M.A. Griffin, P.M. Hart, The impact of organizational climate on safety climate and individual behavior, Saf. Sci. 34 (1-3) (2000) 99-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0925-7535(00)00008-4
  55. J.P. Stevens, Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences, fourth ed., Lawrence Erlbuam Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 2012.
  56. N. Turner, S. Tucker, E.K. Kelloway, Prevalence and demographic differences in microaccidents and safety behaviors among young workers in Canada, J. Saf. Res. 53 (2015) 39-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2015.03.004
  57. M. Akbari, K.B. Lankarani, S.T. Heydari, S.A. Motevalian, R. Tabrizi, Z. Asadi-Shekari, et al., Meta-analysis of the correlation between personality characteristics and risky driving behaviors, J. Injury Violence Res. 11 (2) (2019) 107-122.
  58. J.M. Beus, L.Y. Dhanani, M.A. McCord, A meta-analysis of personality and workplace safety: addressing unanswered questions, J. Appl. Psychol. 100 (2) (2015) 481-498. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037916
  59. S. Clarke, I. Robertson, An examination of the role of personality in work accidents using meta-analysis, Appl. Psychol. 57 (1) (2008) 94-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2007.00267.x
  60. R. Fernandes, R.F.S. Job, J. Hatfield, A challenge to the assumed generalizability of prediction and countermeasure for risky driving: different factors predict different risky driving behaviors, J. Saf. Res. 38 (1) (2007) 59-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2006.09.003
  61. W.G. Graziano, The five-factor model, conscientiousness, and driving accident involvement, J. Pers. 64 (3) (1996) 593-618. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1996.tb00523.x
  62. I. Donald, D. Canter, Employee attitudes and safety in the chemical industry, J. Loss Prev. Process. Ind. 7 (3) (1994) 203-208. https://doi.org/10.1016/0950-4230(94)80067-7
  63. N.P. Gregersen, B. Brehmer, B. Moren, Road safety improvement in large companies. An experimental comparison of different measures, Accid. Anal. Prev. 28 (3) (1996) 297-306. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-4575(95)00060-7

피인용 문헌

  1. Nursing students’ risk perceptions related to medication administration error: A qualitative study vol.58, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2021.103274