Iranian Journal of Ergonomics

There have been many attempts to develop and present a preventative theory of the causes of events for many years. Traditional theories focused more on technical, mechanical, and legal approaches. While these approaches have dramatically reduced occupational injuries, research suggests that between 50 and 90 percent of such accidents are caused by human error or unsafe behaviors. The notion that most accidents are caused by unsafe behaviors or human error has been supported by many researchers. Safety experts believe that increasing focus on human behavior can significantly reduce accidents. Following this shift in focus on the human factor, a psychological approach to occupational safety research was applied. The psychological approach enhances people's understanding of behavior to guide researchers to predict unsafe behaviors and staff to manage these behaviors. Therefore, the purpose of the present study was to investigate the neuroticism, safety efficacy and regulatory focus as predictors of the insecure behavior of Bidband Gas Refinery employees.

 

The present study is a predictive correlational research designed to predict group membership (insecure and secure employees) and achieve a divergent equation. The statistical population is all employees of operational / queue departments (repair, operation, real estate, safety, laboratories) dealing with company operations and occupational hazards with a total of 614 people (285 formal forces, 84 contractors and 245 freelancers). Due to different work units with different ratios in the refinery, stratified random sampling method was used to select the reagent sample. Of the 614 employees at the Bidblad Gas Refinery, 242 were selected using the Krejcie and Morgan table. 350 questionnaires were distributed after obtaining the verbal consent of the research subjects, out of which 311 were delivered and 273 were usable. To divide the staff into two groups of safe and insecure, individuals were first assessed using the Salleh Safe Behaviors Scale. Then, they were grouped by Visual Binning method using SPSS 18 (SPSS INc., Chicago, Ill., USA). Questionnaires distributed among the sample members included Safe Behaviors Scale, Neo Personality Inventory Questionnaire, Safety Efficacy Scale, and Regulatory Focus Scale.

Table 1 shows the correlation coefficients matrix among the variables in the present study.
 

Table 1. Matrix of correlation coefficients among the variables of the present study

** Level of significance at 0.01
 

According to the results of Table 1, all correlation coefficients between the research variables were significant at P-value <0.01.

In the present study, two methods were used to test the research hypothesis (neurodevelopment, safety efficacy, prevention focus, and advancement focus on safe and insecure employees), separately (Table 2).
 

Table 2. Mean tests of the two groups of safe and insecure

As can be seen in Table 2, the small lambda, the large F, and its significant level indicate that the secure and insecure staffing groups are well differentiated in all predictor variables. In other words, the difference between the two groups of safe and unsafe employees is significant. Considering Table 3, we found out that the variables of neuroticism, safety efficacy, prevention focus, and focus concentration were significant at P-value <0.0001. Therefore, the hypothesis of the present study is confirmed that neurodevelopment, safety efficacy, prevention focus, and preventive focus of safe and insecure employees are separated.
 

Table 3. The discriminant function for predictor variables separately

According to Table 3, the discriminant function of neurodevelopmental variables, safety efficacy, prevention concentration, and prophylactic concentration were significant at P-value<0.0001 and these variables have good diagnostic power. The research hypothesis is therefore confirmed. According to the results of Table 3, respectively, safety efficacy, prevention focus, prophylactic focus, and neuroticism were correlated with only the discriminant function. The non-standard coefficients can be obtained using the non-standard coefficients listed in Table 3. According to the secure and insecure group data center shown in Table 3, although a positive score is obtained, it is predicted to be safe, and if negative, the individual is expected to belong to the insecure staff group. The equation for separating safe employees from insecure employees based on predictor variables (neurodevelopment, safety efficacy, prevention focus, and preventive focus) is as follows:  

Overall, the results of this study showed that the variables of neuroticism, safety efficacy, prevention focus and prophylactic focus are able to predict unsafe behaviors in both safe and unsafe employees. Since individual differences play an important role in predicting safety attitudes, it is suggested that the Big Five Questionnaire be administered to employees prior to employment and that those who are neurotic should not be recruited into risky jobs. Also, given that safety efficiency training can be promoted among employees, it is suggested that training based on changing attitudes about self-efficacy and creating a suitable environment for modeling individuals from managers can enhance employee safety efficiency. Finally, managers, bosses, and supervisors are recommended to prioritize the focused approach and recommend it to individuals.

The present study is based on the Master's thesis, which was conducted in the form of a research project (Project Code: 295575) with the financial support of Bidboland Gas Refining Company. Finally, we need to thank the managers and staff of Bidboland Gas Refinery for their cooperation.

 

The authors declared no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this article.