Write your message
Volume 7, Issue 3 (Iranian Journal of Ergonomics 2019)                   Iran J Ergon 2019, 7(3): 57-65 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Toosi K, Neisi A, Arshadi N. An Investigation of Neuroticism, Safety Efficacy and Regulatory Focus as Predictors of Unsafe Work Behavior of Employees Bidboland Gas Refining Company. Iran J Ergon 2019; 7 (3) :57-65
URL: http://journal.iehfs.ir/article-1-652-en.html
1- Master of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz, Iran , kimiyatoosi@yahoo.com
2- Professor, Department of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz, Iran
3- Associate Professor, Department of Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Shahid Chamran University, Ahvaz, Iran
Abstract:   (7249 Views)

Background and Objectives: Most accidents are caused by unsafe behaviors or human errors. Safety experts have argued that with the increasing focus on human behavior, it can significantly reduce accidents. The aim of the present study was to examine neuroticism, safety efficacy and regulatory focus as predictors of unsafe work behavior of employee Bidboland Gas Refining Company.
Methods: The statistical population of the study consisted of all employees of operational and staffing departments of Bidboland Gas Refining Company in Khuzestan. The sample consisted of 273 employees who were selected using stratified random sampling. At first, the participants were divided into two groups, safe employees and unsafe employees by using Safety Behavior Scale (Salleh, 2010). Then to evaluate the variables studied, NEO personality characteristics (Costa & McCrae, 1992), safety efficacy (Brown, et al., 2000) and regulatory focus at work (Wallace & Chen, 2006) questionnaires were used. Data were analyzed through discriminant analysis and using SPSS 16 software.
Results: According to the results, unsafe behavior of employees can be predicted from neuroticism, safety efficacy and regulatory focus and its dimensions (prevention focus and promotion focus).
Conclusion: Neuroticism increases unsafe behaviors and safety efficacy and regulatory focus (prevention focus and promotion focus) decrease unsafe behaviors of employees.

Full-Text [PDF 951 kb]   (8617 Downloads) |   |   Extended Abstract (HTML)  (1017 Views)  

Neuroticism increases unsafe behaviors and safety efficacy and regulatory focus (prevention focus and promotion focus) decrease unsafe behaviors of employees.


Type of Study: Research | Subject: Other Cases
Received: 2019/08/19 | Accepted: 2020/01/11 | ePublished: 2020/01/12

References
1. Ford MT, Tetrick LE. Safety motivation and human resource management in North America. The International Journal of Human Resource Management. 2008; 19(8):1472-1485. [DOI:10.1080/09585190802200231]
2. Hofman DA, Jacobs R, Landy FL. High reliability industries: Individual, micro, and macro organizational influences on safety performance. Journal of Safety Research. 1995; 26:131-149. [DOI:10.1016/0022-4375(95)00011-E]
3. Salleh A. Safety Behavior in the Malaysian Petrochemical Industry (Doctoral dissertation). Changlun: University Utara Malaysia.‏ 2010. [Google Scholar]
4. Seo DC. An explicative model of unsafe work behavior. Safety Science. 2005; 43(3):187-211. [DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2005.05.001]
5. Geller ES. Handbook of psychology of safety. London: Lewis. 2001. [Google Scholar]
6. Cooper MD. Towards a model of safety culture. Safety Science. 2000; 36(2):111-36.‏ [DOI:10.1016/S0925-7535(00)00035-7]
7. Rahimi Pordanjani T. Investigating personal, cognitive and organizational variables as predictors of unsafe behaviors among line workers in an industrial company (Doctoral dissertation). Ahvaz: Shahid Chamran University; 2013. [Persian] [Google Scholar]
8. Beshlideh K. Investigating the personality, cognitive, organizational and biological characteristics as predictions of incident at work in line employees of Khuzestan Steel Company (Doctoral dissertation). Ahvaz: Shahid Chamran University;2007. [Persian] [Google Scholar]
9. Clissold G, Buttigieg DM, De Cieri H. A psychological approach to occupational safety. Asia Pacific Journal of Human Resources. 2012; 50(1):92-109.‏ [DOI:10.1111/j.1744-7941.2011.00002.x]
10. Forcier BH, Walters AE, Brasher EE, Jones JW. Creating a safer working environment through psychological assessment: A review of a measure of safety consciousness. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community. 2001; 22(1):53-65. https://doi.org/10.1300/J005v22n01_06 [DOI:10.1080/10852350109511211]
11. Henning JB, Stufft CJ, Payne SC, Bergman ME, Mannan MS, Keren N. The influence of individual differences on organizational safety attitudes. Safety science. 2009; 47(3):337-45.‏ [DOI:10.1016/j.ssci.2008.05.003]
12. Beecher SD, Scott J, Rojas SL, Barchard KA. Irritated, stressed, and disturbed: Do neurotic people have more accidents? In Western Psychological Association Annual Convention.‏, 2008. [Article] [Google Scholar]
13. Stober J, Otto K, Dalbert C. Perfectionism and the big five: Conscientiousness predicts longitudinal increases in self-oriented perfectionism. Personality and Individual Differences. 2009; 47(4):363-8. [DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2009.04.004]
14. VanDer Vurst G. Linking individual-specific and work based regulatory focus to organizational commitment and behavior (Doctoral dissertation). Ghent: Ghent University; 2012. [Google Scholar]
15. Johnson RE, Chang CH. Development and validation of a work-based regulatory focus scale. In 23rd Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. San Francisco, CA.‏, 2008. [Google Scholar]
16. Katz-Navon TAL, Naveh E, Stern Z. Safety climate in health care organizations: a multidimensional approach. Academy of Management Journal. 2007; 48(6):1075-89. [DOI:10.5465/amj.2005.19573110]
17. Brown KA, Willis PG, Prussia GE. Predicting safe employee behavior in the steel industry: Development and test of a sociotechnical model. Journal of Operations Management. 2000; 18(4):445-65. [DOI:10.1016/S0272-6963(00)00033-4]
18. Wallace C, Chen G. A multilevel integration of personality, climate, self‐regulation, and performance. Personnel Psychology. 2006; 59(3):529-57. [DOI:10.1111/j.1744-6570.2006.00046.x]
19. Higgins ET. Beyond pleasure and pain. American Psychologist. 1997; 52(12):1280.‏ [DOI:10.1037/0003-066X.52.12.1280] [PMID]
20. Rahimi Pordanjani T, Mohamadzade Ebrahimi A. Self-efficacy and self-regulation predicted employee's occupational accidents in an industrial company. TKJ. 2016; 7(3):1-10. [Google Scholar]
21. Beersma B, Homan AC, Van Kleef GA, De Dreu CK. Outcome interdependence shapes the effects of prevention focus on team processes and performance. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2013; 121(2):194-203. [DOI:10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.02.003]
22. Samavatian H, Kamkar M, Negahban H. Relationship between personality traits and attitude towards employee's safety. Psychological Research. 2010; 2(6):44-58. [Persian] [Google Scholar]
23. Beshlideh K. Research methods and statistical analysis of research example using SPSS and AMOS. Ahvaz: Shahid Chamran University; 2014. [Persian] [Google Scholar]
24. Costa PT, McCrae RR. NEO PI-R professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc. Wuhan: Scientific Research Publishing; 1992.
25. Förster J, Higgins ET, Bianco AT. Speed/ accuracy decisions in task performance: Built-in trade-off or separate strategic concerns? Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 2003; 90(1):148-64.‏ [DOI:10.1016/S0749-5978(02)00509-5]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA

Send email to the article author


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

© 2024 CC BY-NC 4.0 | Iranian Journal of Ergonomics

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb |