Constructing lines-of-conduct: Theoretical explanations with empirical evidence

Fitzpatrick, C (1992) Constructing lines-of-conduct: Theoretical explanations with empirical evidence. PhD thesis, Colorado State University, USA.

Abstract

Impacts from natural disasters on human-built environments are increasing. In particular, consequences from major earthquakes are especially problematic. Warning systems can help reduce disasters' toll and earthquake prediction can be used as a warning device to alert people to earthquake hazards. However, effective warning systems require knowledge about how people construct lines-of-conduct. This dissertation presents theoretical explanations for the process of constructing lines-of-conduct along with research investigating the process. Chapter I discusses mechanisms to reduce the impacts of natural disasters. The Parkfield Earthquake Prediction Experiment is presented as such a mechanism. Chapter II explains how people construct lines-of-conduct by first becoming aware of objects in their environment. Awareness is attained by objects becoming stimuli toward which attention is directed. The process of objects becoming stimuli is facilitated or constrained by information and personal-situational factors. Once a state of stimulation is achieved, a sense of disequilibrium occurs and perception formation takes place. Perception formation is influenced by information and personal-situational factors. Cognitions, consisting of ideas and scenarios about what actions to take to restore equilibrium, emerge from formed perceptions. Actions or behaviors in conformity with cognitions generally result. Chapter III presents examples of the lines-of-conduct construction process wherein people hear a warning, perceive the risk, develop ideas about what to do, and engage in actions to reduce risk. This process is variably affected by information and personal-situational factors. Chapter IV depicts the methods used to research this process. Chapter V presents the analyses and findings in a three-fold manner: (1) descriptively to compare findings across study communities; (2) multiple regression to determine the dominant variables operating in the process; and (3) path analysis to ascertain the major influential causal paths. Chapter VI submits implications and conclusions for theory and practice. The dissertation determines that the constructing lines-of-conduct process is variably influenced by information and personal-situational factors but that it fundamentally involves emergent cognitions. Emergent cognitions directly influence behavior. Practical recommendations for developing and implementing effective warning systems and impressions about what remains to be known conclude the dissertation.

Item Type: Thesis (Doctoral)
Thesis advisor: Mileti, D S
Uncontrolled Keywords: earthquake; experiment; hazards; multiple regression
Index terms: toll, experiment, path analysis, multiple-regression, earthquake, cognition, becoming, construction process, evidence, natural disaster, built environment, dissertation
Subjects: statistical analysis, building construction, evaluation and assessment methods, philosophical process, cognitive psychology, infrastructure and transport systems, research dissemination and communication, environmental hazards, data collection methods, transportation engineering
Topics: Engineering Principles, Site Management, Research Practice, Sustainability, Urban Studies
Descriptive scope: 4 PCEA

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