Wang, M and Liao, P C (2024) Experience-based systematic construction hazard warning. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 31(1), pp. 469-486. ISSN 0969-9988
Abstract
Purpose: Hazard warning schemes provide efficient hazard recognition and promote project safety. Nevertheless, these schemes perform poorly because the warning information is calibrated for individual characters and is not prioritized for the entire system. This study proposes a hazard warning scheme that prioritizes hazard characters from the inspection process based on the inspectors' experience. Design/methodology/approach: First, hazard descriptions were decomposed into their characters, forming a double-layer network. Second, warning schemes based on cascading effects were proposed. Third, character-based warning schemes were simulated for various experiences. Findings: The results show that when a specific hazard is detected, the degree centrality is the most effective parameter for prioritization, and hazard characters should be prioritized based on betweenness centrality for experienced inspectors, whereas degree centrality is preferred for novice inspectors. Originality/value: The warning scheme theoretically supplements the information-processing theory in construction hazard warnings and provides a practical warning scheme with priority for the development of automated hazard navigation systems.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | cascading failure; experience; hazard characters; priority; warning scheme |
| Index terms: | methodology, cascading effect, inspection |
| Subjects: | research methods, quality assurance, systems engineering |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Engineering Principles, Quality Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
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