An extension of the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System for use in open systems

Harris, Don; Li, Wen‐Chin

doi:10.1080/14639220903536559

Cited by 36 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…STAMP regards human errors as the symptoms of the system rather than causal factors of accidents requiring analysts to consider how system conditions may lead to "errors". STAMP provides a holistic view of human errors and organisational factors in its analysis, the human factor element of STAMP is somewhat limited and under-specified and managerial and social issues in a socio-technical system are simply viewed as sources of failure in terms of control constraints (Harris and Li, 2011). In addition, STAMP does not provide extensive guidance for understanding why humans behave the way they do (e.g., constraints covering human information processing - France, 2017) and as a result analysts have found it difficult to identify human and organisational failures (Dong, 2012;Suo, 2012;Song, 2012;Niu et al, 2014).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A hybrid human and organisational analysis method for railway accidents based on STAMP-HFACS and human information processing

Tang

Chatzimichailidou

et al. 2019

Applied Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Safety is a constant priority for the railway industry and there are numerous hazards in and around the rail system which may result in damage to train and environment, human injury and fatalities. Low levels of human and organisational performance have been shown to be a prime cause of railway accidents and a number of accident models and methods have been developed in order to probe deeper into the role played by organisational factors in accident causation. The Systems-Theoretical Accident Modelling and Processes (STAMP) method for example, represents a promising systematic and systemic way of examining sociotechnical systems such as the railway. Another method, the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS), based upon Reason's model of human error in an organisational context, has also proved popular as a human factors accident analysis framework. However, human factors elements are still somewhat limited and under-specified and these managerial and social issues within an organisation are simply regarded as sources of failure in the control constraints of STAMP. HFACS likewise, categorises accident data rather than analysing it in more depth. In this context, a hybrid human and organisational analysis method based on HFACS-STAMP (HFACS-STAMP method for railway accidents, HS-RAs) is proposed to identify and analyse human and organisational factors involved in railway accidents. Using the categories of human errors derived from HFACS and the structured systematic analysis process of STAMP, the HS-RAs method provides a mechanism by which active failures can promulgate across organisations and give a systemic analysis of human error in accidents. Combined with human information processing, the HS-RAs method gives a detailed causal analysis of human errors from receiving information to implement control actions. At last, the HS-RAs method is demonstrated using a case study of the 2011 Yong-Wen railway collision. A number of prominent accident causes of human factors are revealed and necessary countermeasures are proposed to avoid the recurrence of similar accidents. The HFACS-STAMP hybrid method has several advantages and can contribute to railway safety by providing a detailed analysis of the role of human error in railway accidents.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A hybrid human and organisational analysis method for railway accidents based on STAMP-HFACS and human information processing

Tang

Chatzimichailidou

et al. 2019

Applied Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Harris and Li suggested that the hybrid analytical procedure described as HFACS-X combining the features of HFACS and STAMP, produces a system with enhanced explanatory power which addresses the shortcomings of both previous systems. [19] Olsen and Shorrock [20] found that the HFACS adapted by the Australian Defence Force (ADF) was unreliable while using it to assess its suitability as incidents analysis frameworks at the air traffic control (ATC) section level. For all three studies done, the result of inter-coder consensus and intra-coder consistency was unacceptable.…”

Section: Insert Figure 2 Here ------------------------------mentioning

confidence: 99%

Arabian, Asian, western: a cross-cultural comparison of aircraft accidents from human factor perspectives

Al-Wardi

2016

International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1. The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) framework (Wiegmann and Shappell 2003)> Some researchers have tried to extend the original HFACS framework to overcome some limitations described above (Reinach and Viale 2006;Harris and Li 2011;Chen et al 2013 Modelling System (GEMS) to define the contents of errors within 'unsafe act' level. Second, it adopted Hawkins's SHEL model to define the categories within 'precondition for unsafe acts' level.…”

Section: Hfacs (Human Factors Analysis and Classification System)mentioning

confidence: 99%

A new approach to analysing human-related accidents by combined use of HFACS and activity theory-based method

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(2017) A new approach to analysing human-related accidents by combined use of HFACS and activity theory-based method.Cognition, Technology and Work, 19 (4). pp. 759-783. ISSN 1435-5566 Final accepted version (with author's formatting)This version is available at: http://eprints.mdx.ac.uk/23629/ Copyright:Middlesex University Research Repository makes the University's research available electronically.Copyright and moral rights to this work are retained by the author and/or other copyright owners unless otherwise stated. The work is supplied on the understanding that any use for commercial gain is strictly forbidden. A copy may be downloaded for personal, non-commercial, research or study without prior permission and without charge.Works, including theses and research projects, may not be reproduced in any format or medium, or extensive quotations taken from them, or their content changed in any way, without first obtaining permission in writing from the copyright holder(s). They may not be sold or exploited commercially in any format or medium without the prior written permission of the copyright holder(s).Full bibliographic details must be given when referring to, or quoting from full items including the author's name, the title of the work, publication details where relevant (place, publisher, date), pagination, and for theses or dissertations the awarding institution, the degree type awarded, and the date of the award.If you believe that any material held in the repository infringes copyright law, please contact the Repository Team at Middlesex University via the following email address:eprints@mdx.ac.ukThe item will be removed from the repository while any claim is being investigated. ABSTRACTThis study proposes a new method for modelling and analysing human-related accidents. It integrates HFACS (Human Factors Analysis and Classification System), which addresses most of the socio-technical system levels and offers a comprehensive failure taxonomy for analysing human errors, and AT (Activity Theory)-based approach, which provides an effective way for considering various contextual factors systematically in accident investigation. By combining them, the proposed method makes it more efficient to use the concepts and principles of AT. Additionally, it can help analysts use HFACS taxonomy more coherently to identify meaningful causal factors with a sound theoretical basis of human activities. Therefore, the proposed method can be effectively used to mitigate the limitations of traditional approaches to accident analysis, such as over-relying on a causality model and sticking to a root-cause, by making analysts look at an accident from a range of perspectives.To demonstrate the usefulness of the proposed method, we conducted a case study in nuclear power plants. Through the case study, we could confirm that it would be a useful method for modelling and analysing human-related accidents, enabling analysts to identify a plausible set of causal factors efficiently in a methodical consideration of contextual b...

show abstract

An extension of the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System for use in open systems

Cited by 36 publications

References 13 publications

A hybrid human and organisational analysis method for railway accidents based on STAMP-HFACS and human information processing

A hybrid human and organisational analysis method for railway accidents based on STAMP-HFACS and human information processing

Arabian, Asian, western: a cross-cultural comparison of aircraft accidents from human factor perspectives

A new approach to analysing human-related accidents by combined use of HFACS and activity theory-based method

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About