Al-Aubaidy, N A; Caldas, C H and Mulva, S P (2022) Assessment of underreporting factors on construction safety incidents in US construction projects. International Journal of Construction Management, 22(1), pp. 103-120. ISSN 1562-3599
Abstract
Underreporting of incidents is detrimental to safety performance. This study assessed factors affecting underreporting by studying the incidence of these factors on projects with good and bad recordkeeping. After conducting thorough literature review, questionnaires A and B were developed. Data obtained from previous research and these two questionnaires were converted to RIDIT scores. Then, the correlation between the data of previous research and the data of questionnaire A and the correlation between the data of previous research and the data of questionnaire B were calculated. The significance of the difference between the correlations of these two independent samples supports the findings of previous research and presents evidence that demonstrates the incidence of these factors is more frequent on projects where the project safety team is doubtful about the accuracy of reporting. The findings emphasize the need to address underreporting factors in companies' efforts towards obtaining more accurate safety reporting.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | construction safety incidents; underreporting |
| Index terms: | literature review, accuracy, construction project, questionnaire, evidence, construction safety, safety performance |
| Subjects: | data analysis and analytics, data collection methods, evaluation and assessment methods, environmental health, occupational health and safety management, production management, professional development |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Health and Safety, Project Management, Research Practice, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
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