Deng, S; Cai, Y; Xie, L and Pan, Y (2023) Group management model for construction workers' unsafe behavior based on cognitive process model. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 30(7), pp. 2928-2946. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Unsafe behavior is a major cause of safety accidents, while in most management measures for unsafe behavior, the construction workers are generally managed as a whole. Therefore, this study aims to propose group management of construction workers' unsafe behavior considering individual characteristics. Design/methodology/approach: A cognitive process model with ten cognitive factors was constructed based on cognitive safety theory. The questionnaire was developed and validated based on the cognitive model, and the results showed that the questionnaire had good reliability and validity, and the cognitive model fitted well. Latent class analysis was used to classify the unsafe behaviors of construction workers. Findings: Four categories of cognitive excellent type, cognitive failure type, no fear type and knowingly offending type were obtained. Workers of cognitive excellent type have good cognitive ability and a small tendency for unsafe behaviors. Workers of cognitive failure type have poor cognitive ability and the potential for cognitive failure in all four cognitive links. Workers of no fear type have weak cognitive ability, and cognitive failure may occur in discovering information and choosing coping links. Workers of knowingly offending type have certain cognitive abilities, but cognitive failure may occur in choosing coping link. Originality/value: This study formulates targeted management measures according to the potential characteristics of these four types and provides scientific theoretical support for the personalized management of unsafe behavior.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cognitive process model; latent class analysis; personalized management; unsafe behaviors |
| Index terms: | questionnaire, cognitive ability, methodology, unsafe behaviour, construction worker, coping, validity, latent class analysis |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, practitioner, cognitive psychology, behavioral psychology, statistical analysis, research methods, financial risk |
| Topics: | Cost Management, Research Practice, Roles and Professions |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here