Psychological Climate and Safety in the Construction Industry – Mediated Influence on Safety Behav...
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 19

Susanna Larsson, Anders Pousette, Marianne Törner 3RD International Conference WORKING ON SAFETY PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 40 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Psychological Climate and Safety in the Construction Industry – Mediated Influence on Safety Behaviour. Susanna Larsson, Anders Pousette, Marianne Törner 3RD International Conference WORKING ON SAFETY 12-15 September 2006. 2. Aim.

Download Presentation

Susanna Larsson, Anders Pousette, Marianne Törner 3RD International Conference WORKING ON SAFETY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Susanna larsson anders pousette marianne t rner 3rd international conference working on safety

Psychological Climate and Safety in the Construction Industry – Mediated Influence on Safety Behaviour

Susanna Larsson, Anders Pousette, Marianne Törner

3RD International Conference

WORKINGONSAFETY

12-15 September 2006


Susanna larsson anders pousette marianne t rner 3rd international conference working on safety

2

Aim

  • Examining mechanisms by which the psychological climate (PC) may influence self-reported safety behaviour (SB)

?

?

PC

SB

?

?

Mediated relationsships


Psychological climate

3

Psychological climate

Individual perceptions of the work environment

encompass the psychological work characteristics:

  • Job/Role

    role clarity, work control, information access, possibilities for work development

  • Leadership

    quality of planning, solving conflicts, social support, feedback

  • Workgroup

    social support, sense of community, feedback

    (Jones and James, 1979)


Susanna larsson anders pousette marianne t rner 3rd international conference working on safety

4

Data

  • Cross-sectional questionnaire data

  • - assembled in a study of safety in Swedish construction industry 2004

  • questionnaire comprised dimensions of psychological climate(8), individual attitudes(4) and safety behaviour(3)


Sample

5

Sample

  • Non-managerial construction workers (N=189)

    -mean age 45.3

    - mean job tenure 23.4

    - 1/3 at least high school education

    - 100% male

  • Response rate 85%


Statistical analysis

6

Statistical Analysis

  • Structural Equation Modelling (SEM)

  • Hypothesis testing:

  • Is the hypothesised model a good representation of the empirical data ?

  • Comparison between different hypothesised models

  • -which model is the best representation of the empirical data?


Mechanisms

7

Structural Interactive Personal safety behaviour

Mechanisms

Four hypothetical models: The models A and B, C and D

(Parker et al., 2003; Neal et al., 2000)

(Parker et al., 2003);Neal et al., 2000; Pousette et al., 2004)

Psychological climate

Safety knowledge

Workplace commitment

Job satisfaction

Safety motivation


Analysis

8

Analysis

  • Three steps:

  • Assessment of fit between each of the four hypothesised models and empirical data (c2, RMSEA, CFI, c2/df)

  • Comparisons between the four hypothesised models (c2- difference test, AIC)

  • Significant regression parameters

  • tested in competition (C.R.>1.96; p.<.05)

  • Non-significant regression parameters

  • were removed – parsimonius model


  • Result

    9

    Result

    Step 1.

    Assessment of fit - all four models acceptable fit

    Model AModel BModel CModel D

    c2 =1717.4c2 =1706.0 c2 =1700.2 c2 =1707.3

    RMSEA=.0067RMSEA=.0067 RMSEA=.0067 RMSEA=.0067

    CFI=.969CFI=.969CFI=.970CFI=.969

    c2/df=1.849c2/df=1.842c2/df=1.836c2/df=1.842

    RMSEA: .05-.08 acceptable fit ; <.05=closer fit

    CFI>.900 acceptable fit

    c2/df: values between 1-2 acceptable fit


    Result1

    10

    Result

    Step 2.

    Comparisons between the models

    A, B, C, D

    Model AModel BModel CModel D

    … Dc2(A)=11.4** Dc2(A)=17.2*** Dc2(A)=10.1**

    AIC=2019.372 AIC=2013.962 AIC=2008.243 AIC=2013.320

    df=929 df=926df=926 df=927

    c2 =1706.0 c2 =1700.2c2 =1707.3

    Dc2(D)=7.1***

    **: significantly better than Model A (p<.05)

    ***significantly better than Model A, D (p<.01)

    AIC: lower values better fit


    Result2

    11

    Result

    Model C the best representation of empirical data

    Psychological climate

    Safety knowledge

    Workplace commitment

    Job satisfaction

    Safety motivation

    Personal

    safety behaviour

    Structural safety behaviour

    Interactive

    safety behaviour


    Result3

    12

    Result

    Step 3.

    Significant regression parameters from the models B and D, introduced in model C

    Non-significant parameters removed one by one


    Result4

    13

    Result

    Final model

    c2 =1700.4

    RMSEA=.066

    CFI=.970

    AIC=1998.448

    c2/df=1.826

    Illustrations of significant paths (p<.05)

    Psychological climate

    Job satisfaction

    Work site commitment

    Safety knowledge

    Safety motivation

    Structural safety behaviour

    Interactive safety behaviour

    Personal safety behaviour


    Discussion

    14

    Discussion

    • The psychological climate related to safety behaviour both directly and indirectly

    • an important area for safety at work

    • Testing four possible mediators in competition clear indication that:

    • - safety knowledge and safety motivation key mediators explaining how the influence between the psychological climate and safety behaviour may occur


    Discussion1

    15

    Discussion

    • In a favourable psychological climate the individual:

    • acquires better knowledge on safety

    • becomes more motivated to behave safely


    Discussion2

    16

    Discussion

    • Fostering a favourable psychological climate - within the management scope

    • Changing workers safety behaviour could be achieved through improvning managerial behaviour


    Discussion3

    17

    Discussion

    Different mechanisms explaining the three aspects of safety behaviour:

    • Personal safety behaviour

    • …using safety equipment, employing safety rules

    • safety motivation

    • - safety knowledge

    • Interactive safety behaviour

    • …raise safety issues in daily work, prevent co-workers and managements hazardous behaviour, provide suggestions for safety improvment

    • - safety motivation


    Discussion4

    18

    Discussion

    • Structural safety behaviour:

    • …participation in safety inspections, safety analyses, risk assessment, safety campaigns

    • direct influence from the psychological climate

    • none of the four hypothesised mediators at work

    • due to work role/assignment?

    • a supportive psychological climate important


    Conclusions

    19

    Conclusions

    • Psychological climate, safety motivation and safety knowledge

    • important areas for improving safety at work

    - safety knowledge and safety motivation key mediators explaining the influence between the psychological climate and safety behaviour

    - different mechanisms at work behind different aspects of safety behaviour


  • Login