Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 73

Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology ? * An homage to Don Campbell PowerPoint PPT Presentation


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

Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology ? * An homage to Don Campbell. Ted Scharf, Ph.D., Research Psychologist National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Cincinnati, Ohio.

Download Presentation

Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology ? * An homage to Don Campbell

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


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology? *An homage to Don Campbell

Ted Scharf, Ph.D., Research Psychologist

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health

Cincinnati, Ohio

* Unceremoniously stolen from: Campbell, D.T. (1984). Can we be scientific in applied social science? In: Conner, R.F., Altman, D.G., and Jackson, C. (Eds.).Evaluation studies: Review Annual. v.9, 1984. Beverley Hills, Sage Publications, pp. 26-48.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

disclaimer –

The findings and conclusions in this presentation have

not been formally disseminated by the National Institute

for Occupational Safety and Health and should not be

construed to represent any agency determination or

policy. Any findings and conclusions in this

presentation are those of the author.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

please ask questions as we move along . . .


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Quasi-experimental methodology:

  • Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

  • Cook, T.D., and Campbell, D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.

  • Shadish, W.R., Cook, T.D., and Campbell, D.T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

Categories of validity:

•statistical conclusion validity

•internal validity

•construct validity

•external validity


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Campbell, D.T. (1984). Can we be scientific in applied social science? In: Conner, R.F., Altman, D.G., and Jackson, C. (Eds.). Evaluation studies: Review Annual. v.9, 1984. Beverley Hills, Sage Publications, pp. 26-48.

contagious cross-validation

competitive replication

i.e. replication is the scientific response to methodological shortcomings or other problems with validity.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Example:

  • Experimentally trained researchers tend to focus on the requirements of internal validity (e.g. requiring a “true” experiment) to the exclusion of concerns related to external validity.

  • Inappropriate use of a Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT):

  • CDC study regarding the prevention of transmission of HIV from birth mother to baby, in Côte d’Ivoire and Thailand, using:

    • reduced dosage of AZT, compared to a . . .

    • placebo control group, rather than to the U.S. standard of care

  • New England Journal of Medicine, v.337, no.12, September 18, 1997 e.g.:

    • Angell, M. The ethics of clinical research in the third world. pp. 847-849.

    • Lurie, P., and Wolfe, S.M. Unethical trials of interventions to reduce perinatal transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus in developing countries. pp.853-856.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

In Cook and Campbell notation, the CDC research design:

  • O1O2 X O3 O4

  • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

  • O1 O2 YO3 O4

  • CDC design:X = experimental, reduced AZT protocol

  • Y = placebo

  • participants:HIV positive, pregnant women


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

A “comparison” group instead of a “control” group:

  • O1O2 X O3 O4

  • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

  • O1 O2 YO3 O4

  • - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

  • O1 O2 ZO3 O4

  • Comparison groups design:

  • X = experimental, reduced AZT protocol

  • Y = U.S. standard AZT treatment

  • Z = AZT protocol, midway between X & Y


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Remember:

  • The “GoldStandard” - Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT):

    • •random selection of subjects / participants

    • •random assignment to experimental conditions

    • •a “no treatment” or “placebo” control group

    • •The origins of the RCT are in experimental and clinical medicine where physicians evaluate the efficacy of a particular drug or treatment

    • •Often described interchangeably as “evidence-based”


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Quasi – experimental methods:

    • •typically used with pre-existing, intact groups

    • measure and evaluate contributing or confounding factors

    • •between groups and within subjects analyses

    • •compare between different treatments

    • •origins of program evaluation methodology are in primary and secondary education


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Reminder:

    • When a new treatment is under test, AND . . .

    • There is no conclusive evidence that the new treatment is more effective than the current standard, THEN . . .

    • We test the new treatment on a sample of eligible subjects, AND

    • Deliver the standard (comparison) treatment to another, different sample

    • AND

  • If there is no known effective treatment,a placebo control group may be considered as a comparison group


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Victora, C.G., Habicht, J-P., and Bryce, J. (2004). Evidence-based public health: Moving beyond randomized trials. American Journal of Public Health, v.94, no.3, pp. 400-405.

  • clinical efficacy trials

  • public health regimen efficacy

  • public health delivery efficacy

  • public health program efficacy

  • public health program effectiveness


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Victora (2004)

    • plausibility evaluation to document impact and rule out alternative explanations, e.g. with a comparison group

      • complex intervention, RCT is artificial

      • large-scale demonstration required

      • ethical concerns preclude use of RCT

    • adequacy evaluation to document time trends

      • assessment of intermediate steps

      • evaluates each step in the presumed causal pathway


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Mohr, L.B. (1995). Impact analysis for program evaluation. 2ed. Thousand Oaks, CA., Sage.

  • “outcome line” – (especially ch.2, Fig 2.1, p.16)

    • preliminary, intermediate and long-term outcomes are modeled

    • other measured factors may influence the outcomes

    • figure below, adapted from Mohr (1995, p.16):

Measured

Activity #1

Measured

Activity #2

Measured

Activity #4

Measured

Activity #3

Measured

Outcome of

Interest

Measured

Ultimate

Outcome

Measured

Subobjective #2

Measured

Subobjective #1


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Mohr, (1995), when:

    • series of related outcomes,

    • interim objectives, or sub-objectives,

    • formative evaluation required,

    • then:

    • attempt to measure all relevant influences in a study


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Disagreements between experimentally trained researchers and researchers trained in quasi-experimental social science methodology are just one example of the ways in which our work can be considered “unscientific.” Within NIOSH:

Rosenstock, L. and Thacker, S. B. (May, 2000). Toward a safe workplace: The role of systematic reviews. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Supplement. v.18, no.4S. Rivara, F.P., and Thompson, D.C. (Eds). , pp.4-5.

and the reply:

NORA Intervention Effectiveness Research Team, (May, 2001). May 2000 Supplement on preventing occupational injuries. Letter to the Editor. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. v.20, no.4. pp. 308-309.

Theoretical perspective (a.k.a. “world views”) can exert a great influence on the conduct of the research.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Altman, I., Rogoff, B., (1987). World views in psychology: Trait, interactional, organismic, and transactional perspectives. In: D. Stokols and I. Altman, (Eds.). Handbook of environmental psychology. v.1. New York: John Wiley and Sons.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Example: The “classic” hierarchy of control.

  • I. Engineering Controls

  • A.eliminate the hazard

  • B.substitution of material, equipment, or process

  • C.isolation of hazard, e.g., barriers and/or removing the worker(s)

  • D.ventilation of airborne contaminants

  • II. Administrative Controls to reduce exposure

  • A.reduced work hours

  • B.employee education and training

  • 1. improved hazard recognition

  • 2. improved work practices

  • III. Personal Protective Equipment (PPE)

  • (Adapted from Raterman, 1996, and Office of Technology Assessment, 1985.)


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

what else do we know about

hazardous work environments ??


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Common features in hazardous work environments – constant change:

  • Variability in:time

  • space / location

  • motion

  • Characteristics or properties of workplace hazards:

  • force(s) creating or causing the hazard

  • types of efforts to control the hazard

  • traditional hierarchy of control

  • degree worker control

  • likelihood of failure of controls

  • predictability and salience

  • work process hazard

  • severity of risk, following exposure

  • interactions with other hazards


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Worker-centered approach to hazardous work environments:

  • Contrary to the traditional Hierarchy of Control:

  • 1) except where a hazard has been completely eliminated from the environment, worker control and participation in managing the hazard are essential; and

  • 2) when the work process is extremely time-limited ‑ or is an actual emergency ‑ workers are most likely to neglect their own safety to complete the emergent task.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

thus, especially in hazardous work environments, there appears to be an incompatible and conflicting set of demands that impinge on front-line workers (in particular):

dual-attention demand:

safety vs. productivity


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

HOWEVER, from the point-of-view of OHP, our perspective on this problem must be:

dual-attention demand:

safety AND productivity

How can we approach this problem?

How can we train workers to adopt this perspective and attitude?


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

brief digression:

Aren’t we compromising safety when we permit considerations of productivity to enter into discussions of safety?


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

brief digression:

Aren’t we compromising safety when we permit considerations of productivity to enter into discussions of safety?

Traditional workplace safety and health viewpoint:

- economics and productivity never mentioned with

respect to safety

- to include economics is to balance a worker’s life

in the same equation with the costs of production

- fundamental principle: safety may not be

compromised for any reason


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

brief digression:

Aren’t we compromising safety when we permit considerations of productivity to enter into discussions of safety?

The real world:

- safety is compromised every day on the job,

especially in hazardous work environments

- employees will take risks with their own lives to

maintain production, (including in situations where

they will not directly benefit)

- especially when fatigued, attention to the production

task becomes rote, and attention to changing

hazards in the surrounding environment ceases


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

brief digression:

Aren’t we compromising safety when we permit considerations of productivity to enter into discussions of safety?

NIOSH and others have come to realize that if we are truly interested in worker safety, we must develop realistic safety training that incorporates day-to-day productivity pressures into the training.

By addressing safety in its real-world context, we:

- enhance safety as a practical, usable, workplace skill

- strive to incorporate safety into the production process,

such that, “the safest way is also the easiest and most

productive way.” (Susan Baker, Johns Hopkins)


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • “what gets measured,

  • gets managed”

  • Professor Peter Chen

  • Colorado State University

  • University of South Australia

  • Orlando, FL., May 18, 2011


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Stokols, D. (1987). Conceptual strategies of environmental psychology. In: D. Stokols and I. Altman, (Eds.). Handbook of environmental psychology. v.1. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

  • and

  • Stokols, D. (1992). Establishing and maintaining healthy environments: Toward a social ecology of health promotion. American Psychologist. v.47, no.1, pp.6-22.

  • and

  • Stokols, D. (2006). Toward a science of transdisciplinary action research. American Journal of Community Psychology, v.38, pp.63-77.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Establishing a contextual perspective; the core assumptions (Stokols, 1987, pp.42-43):

1. psychological phenomena should be viewed in the spatial, temporal, and sociocultural milieu in which they occur;

2. a focus on individuals’ responses to discrete stimuli and events in the short run should be supplemented by more molar and longitudinal analyses of people’s everyday activities and settings;

3. the search for lawful and generalizable relationships between environment and behavior should be balanced by a sensitivity to, and an analysis of, the situation specificity of psychological phenomena;

4. the criteria of ecological and external validity should be explicitly considered (along with the internal validity of the research) not only when:

- designing behavioral studies,

but also when:

- judging the applicability of research findings to the development of

public policies and community interventions.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

This is the search for and identification of the target phenomenon and the relevant contextual variables.

The contextual variables may be identified through:

- an exploratory and atheoretical process, or

- a fully developed contextual theory


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Example: Florida Department of Health responses to the 2004 hurricane season


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Structural equation (two) models:

1. Both work organization and hurricane exposure

measures. Purpose: to establish that the work

organization measures contribute to a model in

which the hurricane exposure measures are

included as predictors.

2. Work organization measures alone. Purpose: to

identify an upper-bound estimate for the effects

of the work organization measures (i.e. without

competing with hurricane exposure measures).


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

prior

hurricane

training

before

2004

W

O

R

K

O

R

G

A

N

I

Z

A

T

I

O

N

T

O

P

I

C

S

2004

difficulty

balancing

work & family

2004

ill

health

6/2005

amount

of sleep

2004

USUHS

hurricane

exposure

scale - 2004

return

to normal

2004-2005

number of

hurricanes

worked

2004

distress

during

hurricanes

2004

prior

hurricane experience

before

2004

bad

mental

health

days

6/2005

job

dissatisfaction

2004-2005

emotional

experiences of

hurricanes

2004

hours

worked

2004

presenteeism

6/2005


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

p<0.001

p<0.01

p<0.05

hypothesized direction (sign of the coefficient)

opposite the hypothesized direction (opposite sign of the coefficient)

latent

variable

(construct)

measured

variable


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Structural equation (two) models:

1. Both work organization and hurricane exposure

measures. Purpose: to establish that the work

organization measures contribute to a model in

which the hurricane exposure measures are

included as predictors.

2. Work organization measures alone. Purpose: to

identify an upper-bound estimate for the effects

of the work organization measures (i.e. without

competing with hurricane exposure measures).


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

role conflict/

compatibility

2004

difficulty

balancing

work & family

2004

ill - health

6/2005

workload

2004

return

to normal

2004-2005

distress

during

hurricanes

2004

social

support

2004

bad

mental

health

days

6/2005

safety

conflict

2004

job

dissatisfaction

2004-2005

control

2004

communication

& work

organization

prob. 2004

presenteeism

6/2005


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

The social ecology of health promotion core assumptions (Stokols, 1992, pp.7-8):

1. efforts to promote human well-being should be based on an understanding of the dynamic interplay among diverse environmental and personal factors;

2. analyses of health and health promotion should address the multidimensional and complex nature of human environments, including:

- physical and social components

- objective and subjective qualities

- scale or immediacy (proximal vs. distal) to individuals and groups

- independent environmental attributes or composite relationships

among several environmental features;


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

The social ecology of health promotion core assumptions (Stokols, 1992, pp.7-8), continued:

3. environmental scale and complexity:

- individuals

- small groups

- organizations

- populations

i.e. multiple levels of analysis using diverse methodologies;

4. dynamic interrelations (or transactions) between people and

environments:

- physical and social features of settings influence participants’

health

- participants modify their surroundings

- interdependencies between immediate & distant environments,

e.g. local, state, and national-level regulations for safety &

health


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Scope of transdisciplinary research, (Stokols, 2006, p.66):


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

What are the disciplinary boundaries of OHP ?

Put another way, what are the most important disciplines with which OHP must interact ?


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Some candidate disciplines that are essential to OHP:

health,

industrial/organizational,

community, and

environmental psychology,

plus

epidemiology,

public health,

occupational medicine,

industrial hygiene,

safety engineering,

and

anthropology,

sociology,

economics.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Stokols, D. (2006). Toward a science of transdisciplinary action research. American Journal of Community Psychology, v.38, pp.63-77.

  • and

  • Rosenfield, P.L., (1992). The potential of transdisciplinary research for sustaining and extending linkages between the health and social sciences. Social Science and Medicine. v.35, no.11, pp.1343-1357.


Something to ask your students

something to ask your students:

“which comes first . . .

the question or the answer ?”


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

and:

“where do research

hypotheses come from ?”


Brief review

brief review:

quantitative methods –

- test existing hypotheses (e.g., consider or rule-out)

- assess concepts we have measured (quantitatively)

- reduce observed results to manageable findings

- enable systematic, replicable, and verifiable

measurement, i.e. fundamental science

quantitative methods do not –

- generate novel explanations about things or events,

e.g. propose new causal pathways

- suggest explanations not previously measured


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

qualitative methods –

- describe and/or explain phenomena or events

- interpret and/or “model” processes or events

- may replicate and verify . . . or suggest unknown processes

or relationships, at same time they provide empirical

data to generate hypotheses or verify a quantifiably

testable hypothesis

qualitative methods provide data specific to a sample and target population from which it was derived

series of qualitative interviews or focus groups produces an iterative and progressive investigation of the selected topic


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

qualitative methods usually are not designed to –

- generalize beyond the actual sample, unless data collected

for this purpose, and replicated with subsequent,

independent groups

- test hypotheses empirically, unless the sample size is

appropriate, i.e., group characteristics sufficiently

known to determine heterogeneous or

homogeneous, and every participant responds to

each question or hypothesis


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

  • Example using qualitative methods:

  • topic of investigation: risks for injury among family

  • farmers, e.g. Kidd, et al., 1996

  • method of investigation: series of focus groups

  • farm family members are judges regarding the farm

  • environment – look for agreement between the

  • participants both within groups and across the series

  • of groups

  • sample the maximum variability in farm environments

    • different regions

    • different enterprises (crops, livestock, etc.)

    • different sizes of operations

  • each group should be relatively cohesive / homogenous


Example of a qualitative method generating a model to be tested quantitatively

Example of a qualitative method generating a model to be tested quantitatively:

Kidd, et al., 1996


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Building a Research Team

  • Organizational representation (local)

  • clinic professionals & staff

  • businessowners/managers

  • labor union(s) representatives

  • social service agencies

  • Community representation

  • Professional / technical expertise

    • academia/research

  • manufacturer(s)

  • non-governmental organizations (NGO’s)

  • public health & other government orgs.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Also:

Research subjects / patients

Patient advocates

Family members of clients, patients, or workers

Other workers & community members

Typically NOT part of research team – why?

–why not?


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Traditional experimental science measures subjects’ behavior, attitudes, etc., but does not involve the “objects” of the research in the planning.

However, qualitative methods show us the way to systematically elicit research hypotheses from our subjects.

Therefore, asking members of the subject class or group to help plan the implementation of the research is just an extension of our focus group example.

Result: ordinary research / evaluation study with the insight and participation of representatives of your subjects as research team members.


Example

Example:

  • Simple Solutions – nursery tool development process

    • multi-disciplinary team from University of California, Davis

    • three large nursery companies

      • OSHA 200 logs

      • ergonomic checklist completed by workers and supervisors

      • interviews with workers and supervisors

        Janowitz, et al., 1998; and Prof. John Miles, personal communication, 2004.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Simple Solutions – nursery tool development process

high risk job tasks selected (high risk for work-related musculo-skeletal disorders)

tool design involved nursery workers and university team

workers and team – together – designed the tools

imperfect or incorrect designs were manufactured because workers made the suggestion

then the workers helped design improvements

Janowitz, et al., 1998; and Prof. John Miles, personal communication, 2004.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

What does all this mean for OHP, NIOSH and all of CDC?

National Institute FOR Occupational Safety and Health

National Center FOR Injury Prevention and Control

National Center FOR Environmental Health

National Center FOR HIV/AIDS, Viral Hepatitis, STD, and TB Prevention

National Center FOR Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion

All in the:

Centers FOR Disease Control and Prevention

Conclusion: like NIOSH, Occupational Health Psychology promotes safety and health at work.


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Perspective on evaluation methodology:

  • Health care interventions, changes to improve workplace safety and health, and even pre-placement exams are (essentially) components of natural experiments

  • Identifying and developing systematic measurements of interventions and workplace programs are tasks of research

  • Once systematic measurements are collected, the interventions and workplace programs will then include a study of intervention effectiveness

  • Results from the evaluation of effectiveness may be used to:

    • improve current effectiveness

    • identify additional program needs

    • promote diffusion of the intervention to additional communities, occupations, other participants


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Interventions for injury prevention and health promotion, or a few specifics that illustrate the preceding discussion:

Training style:

  • learner centered training

  • active participation

  • problem solving

  • discussions among / between co-workers

  • crew-based solutions to problems

  • encourage creative approaches to problems

  • transfer of skills from experienced to less

    experienced job / task performers

  • site-specific focus, especially with intact work crews:

    • discuss prior workplace hazards, problems,

      and the solutions developed

    • promote crew approaches to specific

      problems on-site


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Training principles:

  • front-line worker control is essential where hazards

  • are present

  • promote good communication, cooperation, and pre-

  • planning between workers and front-line supervisors

  • safety is a skill

  • integrate safety with production as the performance

  • standard, i.e. safety and productivity are inter-

  • dependent in the work organization and processes

  • subject-matter experts (including veteran workers)

  • identify hazards and develop plans to reduce risk


Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

Training principles - 2:

  • hazard recognition:

    • is not simply identifying existing problems in the

    • work environment

    • includes anticipating incipient problems that may

    • be likely to develop

    • once identified, hazards can be prioritized for

    • elimination or mitigation, with an emphasis on

    • reducing risk

  • crew-based solutions promote:

    • improved safe-work practices

    • reduction in variability on critical tasks

    • improved safety climate


  • Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

    References:

    Altman, I., Rogoff, B., (1987). World views in psychology: Trait, interactional, organismic, and transactional perspectives. In: D. Stokols and I. Altman, (Eds.). Handbook of environmental psychology. v.1. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Angell, M. (1997). The ethics of clinical research in the third world. New England Journal of Medicine. v.337, no.12. (September 18, 1997.) pp.847-849.

    Baron, S., Estill, C.F., Steege, A., and Lalich, N., (Eds.) (2001). Simple solutions: Ergonomics for farm workers. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2001-111.

    Campbell, D.T. (1984). Can we be scientific in applied social science? In: Conner, R.F., Altman, D.G., and Jackson, C. (Eds.).Evaluation studies: Review Annual. v.9, 1984.Beverley Hills, Sage Publications, pp. 26-48.)

    Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J. (1966). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

    Cole, H.P. (1997). Stories to live by: A narrative approach to health behavior research and injury prevention. In: Gochman, D.S., ed. Handbook of health behavior research IV: Relevance for professionals and issues for the future. New York, NY: Plenum Press., pp. 325-349.

    Cole, H.P., Lehtola, C.J., Thomas, S.R., and Hadley, M. (2005). No way to meet a neighbor, 2ed. Simulation exercise. Available at: http://nasdonline.org/document/1014/9/d000997/the-kentucky-community-partners-for-healthy-farming-rops-project.html.


    Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

    References - 2

    Cole, H.P., Lehtola, C.J., Thomas, S.R., and Hadley, M. (2000). Facts about tractor/motor vehicle collisions. Available at: http://nasdonline.org/static_content/documents/1014/TMVC%20doc.pdf.

    Cook, T.D., and Campbell, D.T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Glascock, L.A., Bean, T.L., Wood, R.K., Carpenter, T.G., and Holmes, R.G. (1995). A summary of roadway accidents involving agricultural machinery. Journal of Agricultural Safety and Health. v.1, no.2, pp.93-104.

    Janowitz, I., Meyers, J.M., Tejeda, D.G., Miles, J.A., Duraj, V., Faucett, J., and Kabashima, J. (1998). Reducing risk factors for the development of work-related musculoskeletal problems in nursery work. Applied Occupational & Environmental Hygiene. v.13, no.1, pp 9-14. (Now published as the Journal of Applied Occupational & Environmental Hygiene.)

    Kidd, P.S., Scharf, T., and Veazie, M.A. (1996). Linking stress and injury in the farming environment: A secondary analysis of qualitative data. In: C.A. Heaney and L.M. Goldenhar, (Eds.). Health Education Quarterly. Theme: Worksite health programs. v.23, no.2, pp. 224-237.

    Kowalski, K.M., Fotta, B., and Barrett, E.A. (1995, August). Modifying Behavior to Improve Miners' Hazard Recognition Skills Through Training. Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth annual Institute on Mining Health, Safety and Research. Blacksburg, VA, pp.95-104.


    Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

    References - 3

    Lurie, P., and Wolfe, S.M. (1997). Unethical trials of interventions to reduce perinatal transmission of the human immunodeficiency virus in developing countries. New England Journal of Medicine. v.337, no.12. (September 18, 1997). pp.853-856.

    Mohr, L.B. (1995). Impact analysis for program evaluation. 2ed. Thousand Oaks, CA., Sage.

    National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (2011, April). Early estimate of motor vehicle traffic fatalities in 2010. Traffic Safety Facts: Crash Stats. DOT HS 811 451. Available at: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811451.pdf

    National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (2011, July). Seat belt use in 2010 – Use rates in the states and territories. Traffic Safety Facts: Crash Stats. DOT HS 811 493. Available at: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/Pubs/811493.pdf

    National Highway Transportation Safety Administration (2008). 2006 motor vehicle occupant protection facts. DOT HS 810 654. Available at: http://www.nhtsa.gov/DOT/NHTSA/Traffic%20Injury%20Control/Articles/Associated%20Files/810654.pdf.

    NORA Intervention Effectiveness Research Team, (May, 2001). May 2000 Supplement on preventing occupational injuries. Letter to the Editor. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. v.20, no.4. pp. 308-309.


    Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

    References - 4

    Office of Technology Assessment, U.S. Congress. 1985. Preventing Illness and Injury in the Workplace. ch.9, pp.173-185. OTA‑H‑256 Washington, D.C.

    Perdue, C., Kowalski, K.M., and Barrett, E.A. (1994). Hazard Recognition in Mining: A Psychological Perspective. US Bureau of Mines, Department of the Interior, Circular IC #9422. 

    Raterman, S.M. 1996. Methods of control. In: Plog, B.A., Niland, J., and Quinlan, P.J., (eds). Fundamentals of Industrial Hygiene. 4th ed, ch.18, pp.531-552. National Safety Council, Itasca, IL. Revised from: Olishifski, J.B. 1988. Methods of control. In: Plog, B.A., Benjamin, G.S., and Kerwin, M.A. (eds). Fundamentals of Industrial Hygiene. 3rd ed, ch.20, pp.457-474. National Safety Council, Chicago, IL.

    Rethi, L., Flick, J., Kowalski, K., and Calhoun, R. (1999). Hazard recognition training program for Construction, maintenance and repair activities. Pittsburgh, PA., DHHS (NIOSH): 99-158.

    Robson, L.S., Shannon, H.S., Goldenhar, L.M., and Hale, A.R. (2001). Guide to evaluating the effectiveness of strategies for preventing work injuries: How to show whether a safety intervention really works.National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio. Institute for Work and Health, Toronto, Canada. DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2001-119.

    Rosenfield, P.L., (1992). The potential of transdisciplinary research for sustaining and extending linkages between the health and social sciences. Social Science and Medicine. v.35, no.11, pp.1343-1357.


    Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

    References - 5

    Rosenstock, L. and Thacker, S. B. (May, 2000). Toward a safe workplace: The role of systematic reviews. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. Supplement. v.18, no.4S. Rivara, F.P., and Thompson, D.C. (Eds). , pp.4-5.

    Scharf, T., Hunt, J., III, McCann, M., Pierson, K., Repmann, R., Migliaccio, F., Limanowski, J., Creegan, J., Bowers, D., Happe, J., and Jones, A. (2011). Hazard Recognition for Ironworkers: Preventing Falls and Close Calls – Updated Findings. In, Hsaio, H., Keane, P. (Eds.). “Research and Practice for Fall Injury Control in the Workplace: Proceedings of International Conference on Fall Prevention and Protection.” Morgantown, WV., NIOSH. May 18-20, 2010.

    Scharf, T., Vaught, C., Kidd, P., Steiner, L., Kowalski, K., Wiehagen, B., Rethi, L., and Cole, H. (2001). Toward a typology of dynamic and hazardous work environments. Human and Ecological Risk Assessment. v.7,no.7, pp.1827‑1841.

    Shadish, W.R., Cook, T.D., and Campbell, D.T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co.

    Stokols, D. (1987). Conceptual strategies of environmental psychology. In: D. Stokols and I. Altman, (Eds.). Handbook of environmental psychology. v.1. New York: John Wiley and Sons.

    Stokols, D. (1992). Establishing and maintaining healthy environments: Toward a social ecology of health promotion. American Psychologist. v.47, no.1, pp.6-22.


    Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

    References - 6

    Stokols, D. (2006). Toward a science of transdisciplinary action research. American Journal of Community Psychology, v.38, pp.63-77.

    Victora, C.G., Habicht, J-P., and Bryce, J. (2004). Evidence-based public health: Moving beyond randomized trials. American Journal of Public Health, v.94, no.3, pp. 400-405.

    Villarejo, D., Lighthall, D., Williams, D., Souter, A., Mines, R., Bade, B., and Samuels, S., (2000). Suffering in silence: A report on the health of California’s agricultural workers.California Institute for Rural Studies, Davis, CA. Available at: http://www.cirsinc.org/news.html#SiS

    Wiehagen, B., Conrad, D., Friend, T., and Rethi, L. (2002). Considerations in training on-the-job trainers. pp.27-34. In: Peters, R.H., (Ed.). Strategies for improving miners’ training. Information Circular 9463. Pittsburgh, PA., DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2002-156.

    Wiehagen, W.J., Conrad, D.W., and Baugher, J.M. (2006). Job training analysis: A process for quickly developing a roadmap for teaching and evaluating job skills. Information Circular (IC) 9490. Pittsburgh, PA: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Pittsburgh Research Laboratory, DHHS (NIOSH) Publication No. 2006-139. August, 2006.

    Wiehagen, W.J., Lineberry, G.T., and Rethi, L.L., (1996). The Work Crew Performance Model: A Method for Defining and Building Upon the Expertise Within an Experienced Work Force,SME Transactions, Vol. 298, pp. 1925-1931.


    Can we be scientific in the practice of occupational health psychology an homage to don campbell

    Thank you . . . .


  • Login