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

Al-Wardi, Yousuf

doi:10.1080/10803548.2016.1190233

Cited by 6 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…<insert Figure 8 about here> A total of 10 (23.3%) studies in the civil and/or military aviation context reported the frequency of the presence of a HFACS category (Wiegmann and Shappell, 2001;Gaur, 2005;Li and Harris, 2006;Shappell et al, 2007;Lenne et al, 2008;Li et al, 2008;Hooper and O'Hare, 2013;Li and Harris, 2013;Daramola, 2014;Al-Wardi, 2017) (Figure 9). The weighted mean proportions and standard deviations of 18 HFACS categories are based on 2,813 accidents (i.e., 47.2% of the total accidents analysed).…”

Section: Hfacs Classificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What do applications of systems thinking accident analysis methods tell us about accident causation? A systematic review of applications between 1990 and 2018

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: This systemic review examines and reports on peer reviewed studies that have applied systems thinking accident analysis methods to better understand the cause of accidents in a diverse range of sociotechnical systems contexts.Methods: Four databases (PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus, Web of Science) were searched for published articles during the dates 01 January 1990 to 31 July 2018, inclusive, for original peer reviewed journal articles. Eligible studies applied AcciMap, the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS), the Systems Theoretic Accident Model and Processes (STAMP) method, including Causal Analysis based on STAMP (CAST), and the Functional Resonance Analysis Method (FRAM). Outcomes included accidents ranging from major events to minor incidents.Results: A total of 73 articles were included. There were 20, 43, six, and four studies in the Accimap, HFACS, STAMP-CAST, and FRAM methods categories, respectively. The most popular accident contexts were aviation, maritime, rail, public health, and mining. A greater number of contributory factors were found at the lower end of the sociotechnical systems analysed, including the equipment/technology, human/staff, and operating processes levels. A majority of studies used supplementary approaches to enhance the analytical capacity of base applications.Conclusions: Systems thinking accident analysis methods have been popular for close to two decades and have been applied in a diverse range of sociotechnical systems contexts. A number of researchbased recommendations are proposed, including the need to upgrade incident reporting systems and further explore opportunities around the development of novel accident analysis approaches.

show abstract

Section: Hfacs Classificationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

What do applications of systems thinking accident analysis methods tell us about accident causation? A systematic review of applications between 1990 and 2018

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Instead, the proportionate number of fatal accidents varied significantly and to an extent that cannot immediately be explained by differences in reporting practices. Previous research has shown that national culture can play a role in aircraft accidents related to human factors [19]; future work may investigate whether safety cultures and regulation differences provide a better explanation of the results of this study and whether they should be the focus of improvement in ultralight aviation practices.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 88%

Ultralight Accidents in the US, UK, and Portugal

Voogt

Chaves

Harden

et al. 2018

Safety

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ultralight accidents are reported to be more severe compared to those in other categories of sports aviation. In the absence of denominator data in the United States (US) but addressing a continuing concern in general aviation safety, this study gives a comparison between ultralight accidents in the US, the United Kingdom (UK) and Portugal. For the period 2000-2010, 35 accidents occurred in Portugal, 252 in the UK and 20 in the US. They were compared for their proportionate number of fatal accidents, their main causes, and the characteristics of the pilots. The UK showed a significantly smaller proportionate number of fatal accidents compared to that of the US and Portugal. The proportionate number of destroyed aircraft was significantly higher in Portugal than in the US, with the UK showing an even smaller percentage. The general profile of the pilots did not differ notably, but the types of causes were more often attributed to pilot error or piloting technique in Portugal compared to the other two countries. While the proportionate number of fatalities is a strong indicator of the differences between the three countries, the varying reporting traditions and regulations preclude a direct comparison. Nevertheless, based on these data, the concern for ultralight safety in the US has not diminished since previous studies. Although the concerns are similar to those raised for Portugal, US ultralight safety may benefit from practices in the UK.

show abstract

“…Chen et al used HFACs to study the cause of ship collision accidents, and found that human and organizational factors have more significant impact on the occurrence probability [9], while Zhang et al used HFACs to investigate the contributing factors of major road traffic accidents and found that unsafe acts, violations, and inadequate regulations are the most important factors [10]. Similar researches also exist in various fields, such as maritime [11][12][13], coal mine [14][15][16], aviation [17][18][19], transportation [20][21][22], construction [23,24], and so on. Hulme et al [25] collected 43 studies, which analyzed the causes of accidents by HFACs from 2000 to 2018 and found there are 15 studies belong to the field of aviation, and there are 10, seven, six, and two studies belong to the field of maritime, mining, transportation, and construction, respectively.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Cause Analysis of Unsafe Behaviors in Hazardous Chemical Accidents: Combined with HFACs and Bayesian Network

Liu

Liu³

2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hazardous chemical accidents (HCAs) seriously endanger public life, property, and health. Human and organizational factors are important causes of many kinds of accidents. In order to systematically explore the influencing factors of unsafe behaviors in HCAs in China, the method of human factors analysis and classification system based on the Bayesian network (BN-HFACs) was introduced. According to the 39 investigation reports of HCAs in China, the origin Bayesian network (BN) was obtained and the failure sensitivity of every node in BN was calculated. The results have shown that hazardous material environment (1.63) and mechanical equipment (0.49) in the level of preconditions of unsafe behavior have the same direction failure effect with operation error, while there is no factor has the same direction failure effect with operation violate. Some factors in organization influence and unsafe supervision, such as organization climate (0.34), operation guidance (0.37), planned operation (0.22), and legal supervision (0.19), are also important reasons for operational errors, while resource management (0.12), hidden investigation (0.18) and legal supervision (0.13) have an impact on operation violates. Moreover, there are still close relationships between other hierarchical elements, such as the operation guidance effect on the hazardous material environment (6.60), and the organizational climate has the most obvious impact on other factors at the level of organizational factors. Based on the above research conclusions, suggestions for individual, enterprise, and government were put forward, respectively, and the limitations of this study were also clarified.

show abstract

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

Abstract: Although not given much consideration, national culture can have an impact on aviation safety. This study revealed that national culture plays a role in aircraft accidents related to human factors that cannot be disregarded.

Cited by 6 publications

References 7 publications

What do applications of systems thinking accident analysis methods tell us about accident causation? A systematic review of applications between 1990 and 2018

What do applications of systems thinking accident analysis methods tell us about accident causation? A systematic review of applications between 1990 and 2018

Ultralight Accidents in the US, UK, and Portugal

Cause Analysis of Unsafe Behaviors in Hazardous Chemical Accidents: Combined with HFACs and Bayesian Network

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About