Safety metaphors and theories, a review of the occupational safety literature of the US, UK and The Netherlands, till the first part of the 20th century

Improving Organisational Health and Safety Performance: Theoretical Framework and Contemporary Approaches

“…This is largely due to the realization that, in order to qualify as an Act of God, an accident needed to be due to natural causes without human intervention [37]Accident proneness, on the other hand; has been the subject of some recent research published from industries such as railways [76] and air force [77]The results, however, are inconclusive; with some evidence that some people may be accident prone in given situations. Recent reviews, however, suggest a number of weaknesses with this theory; including low correlation between test results and accident figures, a realization that correlation was not a proof of causal relationship; the studies being retrospective and dependent on accident registration by companies; reliability of registration information; vagueness of definitions used, and variations in its operationalization [10] [78]. Earlier reviews have similarly concluded that, in order for accident proneness to be accepted as a stable personality characteristic, it needed to be measured reliably proven to be a valid predictor [79].…”

Is big data risk assessment a novelty?

“…A whole range of books and publications were also published that dealt with practical safety issues for specific branches of industry and there were general reference books that addressed the managerial aspects of safety (Swuste et al, 2010).…”

“…Vernon's (1936) reference book on safety addressed the influence of temperature, fatigue, speed of production, ventilation and alcohol consumption on safety (Swuste et al, 2010;Vernon, 1936). Again, this work was based on extensive datasets from investigations in factories.…”

“…It is commonly believed that safety and major accidents are related and are sometimes causally linked to the behaviour of front line operators and workers, safety culture and safety management systems. The focus on behaviour began in the early 20th century, the American Safety First Movement (Aldrich, 1997;Hoffman, 1909;Palmer, 1926;Swuste, van Gulijk, & Zwaard, 2010), being its first and powerful promotor. In 1919 the accident proneness theory of Greenwood & Woods provided a scientific basis for what was termed the individual hypothesis that was used to explain accident causation.…”

“…It will be restricted to developments in metaphors, models and theories on accident causation (Swuste et al, 2010(Swuste et al, , 2015Swuste, Van Gulijk, Zwaard, & Oostendorp, 2014). The two research questions below will be central to this paper:…”