Morrow, S; Cameron, I and Hare, B (2015) The effects of framing on the development of the design engineer: Framing health and safety in design. Architectural Engineering and Design Management, 11(5), pp. 338-359. ISSN 1745-2007
Abstract
Research evidence show that designers can play an important part in reducing risks to those involved in construction site activities. This research study aims to consider health and safety through design by focusing on the issues as perceived by the designers. The findings in this study provide a link between how designers form their view, understanding and interpretation (i.e. their framing) of the term health and safety and how this can affect their design behaviour. This new understanding will help interested parties to instigate new ways for inducing positive changes in design behaviour that will result in marked improvements to the health and safety of all who are affected by the activities of the construction industry.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design behaviour; design process; framing; grounded theory; health and safety |
| Index terms: | evidence, construction industry, design behaviour, design process, health and safety, grounded theory, construction site, engineer, designer, framing |
| Subjects: | cognitive psychology, industry analysis, theoretical framing, health safety and environment, work location, conceptual models, profession, evaluation and assessment methods, design methods |
| Topics: | Site Management, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Health and Safety |
| 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