Wang, X; Qiao, Y; Wang, D; Sheng, Z and Newaz, M T (2021) Psychological contract of safety and construction worker behavior: Felt safety responsibility and safety-specific trust as mediators. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 147(11): 04021152, ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
The psychological contract of safety (PCS) can be understood as the beliefs of employees regarding the reciprocal safety obligations between themselves and their supervisors. Although research has established that PCS is critical to safety management in construction sites, there is limited evidence on how PCS affects construction workers' safety behavior, including compliance and participation. Building upon the psychological contract theory and social exchange theory, this study investigates the mediating mechanisms that link PCS to safety compliance and safety participation, that is, felt safety responsibility and safety-specific trust in supervisors. Overall, 389 valid data points from multiple sources comprising construction workers and their supervisors from 15 construction projects were collected. The results reveal that felt safety responsibility and safety-specific trust in supervisors partially mediate the relationships between PCS and both safety compliance and safety participation. The findings extend the safety behavior literature by clarifying the two distinct PCS processes toward safety behavior. Interventions should target improving employees' perception of PCS to support their engagement in safety behavior.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | felt safety responsibility; psychological contract of safety; safety behavior; safety-specific trust in supervisor |
| Index terms: | construction project, evidence, safety management, compliance, construction site, psychological contract, social exchange theory, construction worker, supervisor, mediator, safety behaviour |
| Subjects: | evaluation and assessment methods, practitioner, dispute resolution, psychology, work location, social theory, production management, health safety and environment, occupational health and safety management |
| Topics: | Project Management, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Roles and Professions, Legal Issues, Organizational Design, Site Management |
| 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