Liu, D (2009) Multi-phase empirical investigation and path modeling of construction workers' use of personal fall arrest systems. PhD thesis, Ohio State University, USA.
Abstract
Personal Fall Arrest Systems (PFAS) are required use by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration for construction employees who work at heights above six feet. However, the literature indicates that current levels of usage of PFAS are not adequate to reduce the number of fall-related injuries. To date, there are no published models describing PFAS usage and factors affecting that usage. Therefore, the objective of this research was to propose and develop a model that presents the main factors affecting PFAS use, including their interactions, in order to improve the understanding of factors that affect PFAS use. In the long term, such knowledge may help to increase PFAS use among construction workers. Survey, interviews and participatory workshops were applied in the first three phases of this study to supplement the published literature in assisting us to analyze current usage of PFAS among construction workers and views of PFAS from construction workers and other stakeholders in the construction industry. Analysis of data from all these sources led to the development of a preliminary model of PFAS, and selection of the effect of training on PFAS use, in a longitudinal study to test the model. The Technology Acceptance Model, with modifications from models of health and safety behavior, formed the bases for the preliminary model of PFAS use. In order to investigate the effectiveness of fall protection training in affecting one’s usage intention and actual behavior of PFAS use, a survey was conducted among PFAS users who attended fall protection training courses. More importantly, two research questions were answered in this phase of the study: what are the significant drivers of PFAS use; and what are the correlations between the factors. This study provided a theoretical and empirical foundation for understanding the factors contributing to construction workers’ PFAS use. A path model of PFAS use was developed and validated for the first time. The developed model explained 40% of the variance accounting for usage intentions. Perceived Value, Perceived Ease of Use, Subjective Norm and Supervisory Enforcement were determined to be positive drivers of usage intentions. Additionally, the results from this study also showed that fall protection training is effective in improving influence from Perceived value, Perceived Ease of Use and Subjective Norm to one’s usage intention of PFAS. The anticipated benefit of this study is an improved understanding of PFAS use, which, in turn, may lead to intervention research that targets the factors that have been identified as affecting PFAS use.
| Item Type: | Thesis (Doctoral) |
|---|---|
| Thesis advisor: | Sommerich, C M |
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | health and safety; safety; training; workshops |
| Index terms: | construction industry, modelling, interaction, subjective norm, construction worker, enforcement, technology acceptance model, effectiveness, investigation, occupational safety and health, construction employee, variance, workshop, accounting, perceived ease of use, survey, interview, health and safety, injury |
| Subjects: | data collection methods, performance management, industry analysis, health conditions and diseases, measurement and scaling, occupational health and safety management, practitioner, construction type, analytical methods, economic analysis, acoustic properties, health safety and environment, behavioral psychology, social justice |
| Topics: | Health and Safety, Engineering Principles, Ethics, Quality Management, Business Strategy, Research Practice, Roles and Professions, Construction Technology |
| Descriptive scope: | 5 PCTEA |
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