International Encyclopedia of the Social &Amp; Behavioral Sciences 2015
DOI: 10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.73022-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Workplace Safety and Health

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 18 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Since the conclusion by Greenwood and Woods (1919) that ‘…it seems that the genesis of multiple accidents under uniform external conditions is an affair of personality…’ ( Greenwood and Woods, 1919 ), psychologists have been interested in individual differences in accident causation. While accident proneness theory, that is, the idea people who repeatedly have accidents are accident prone, has been widely refuted by theoretical and empirical grounds ( McKenna, 1983 ; Salminen, 2001 ; Fay and Tissington, 2004 ; Purpura, 2019 ), the wide consensus among researchers seems to be that certain individual difference factors, such as cognitive factors or personality character traits, make some individuals more liable to accidents than others ( McKenna, 1983 ; Lawton and Parker, 1998 ; Diamant and Rusou, 2021 ; Niranjan et al, 2022 ). One difference between the ‘differential accident involvement’ concept by McKenna (1983) and ‘accident proneness’ ( Shaw and Sichel, 1971 ) is that the former refers to individual difference factors which increase the accident liability, whereas the latter focuses on the identification of ‘rotten apples’ who account for the most of the accidents.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Since the conclusion by Greenwood and Woods (1919) that ‘…it seems that the genesis of multiple accidents under uniform external conditions is an affair of personality…’ ( Greenwood and Woods, 1919 ), psychologists have been interested in individual differences in accident causation. While accident proneness theory, that is, the idea people who repeatedly have accidents are accident prone, has been widely refuted by theoretical and empirical grounds ( McKenna, 1983 ; Salminen, 2001 ; Fay and Tissington, 2004 ; Purpura, 2019 ), the wide consensus among researchers seems to be that certain individual difference factors, such as cognitive factors or personality character traits, make some individuals more liable to accidents than others ( McKenna, 1983 ; Lawton and Parker, 1998 ; Diamant and Rusou, 2021 ; Niranjan et al, 2022 ). One difference between the ‘differential accident involvement’ concept by McKenna (1983) and ‘accident proneness’ ( Shaw and Sichel, 1971 ) is that the former refers to individual difference factors which increase the accident liability, whereas the latter focuses on the identification of ‘rotten apples’ who account for the most of the accidents.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The proponents of OHS advocate for the use of protective equipment by workers, including the use of face masks to protect against dust inhalation [23]. PPE should be used as a control measure but not to eliminate the hazard during construction work [24].…”
Section: E M Nghitanwa L Zungu Open Journal Of Safety Science Andmentioning
confidence: 99%