The effects of stress on employee tendency to paticipate in safety under three cognitive biases

Abstract

This study's overarching goal was to explore the effect stress has on employee safety decision-making under three safety participation hindering cognitive biases. Safety research often involves analysis on injuries and illnesses after occurrence, using lagging indicators to estimate trends, for example. The present research is forward-looking, investigating the predictive value of stress variables to the likelihood of safe choices. Utilizing the framework of the Precaution Adoption Process Model to categorize behavioral decision-making, the goal was to determine where life and work stress may predict the adoption of safe behavior. Two research questions were pursued: 1. Are Perceived Life Stress and Perceived Work Stress significant predictors of employee tendency to engage in safety and the extent of their engagement if they decide to participate, under the Recency, Melioration, and Free-ride cognitive biases? 2. Is choice distribution significantly different among the Recency, Melioration, and Freeride cognitive biases? The study also incorporated COVID-19, work history, and demographic variables as potential stressors. A survey was developed and deployed. Perceived life stress scale (PSS-Cohen, 1994), perceived work stress scale, the National Population Health Survey (NPHS -Wang, et al., 2001), COVID-19, work history, and demographic variables were used in conjunction with decision simulations framed as the three cognitive biases of Recency, Melioration, and Free-ride Social Dilemma. The decision-making simulations' presentation choices were molded into the Precaution Adoption Process Model stages. Participants (n=206) were employees of utility units and companies in Central Iowa.ix Perceived life stress was only a significant predictor of a tendency of engagement in safety in the Recency bias. Work stress was not a significant predictor of engagement in safety in any of the biases, nor a significant predictor of the extent of engagement in safety in any of the three biases. Losing someone close due to COVID-19 was a significant predictor of the extent of engagement in safety only in the Free-ride bias. Recent injury was a significant predictor of a tendency to engage in safety in the Melioration and Free-ride bias. Having a team member suffer an injury was a predictor of engagement in only the Free-ride bias.The distribution of choices was significantly different among the three biases. However, no significance was detected when the choices were consolidated to either act or not act. The results are discussed in the framework of the Precaution Adoption Process Model.