Linking Basic Human Values, Risk Perception, Risk Behavior and Accident Rates: The Road to Occupational Safety
Corresponding email: widyanti@mail.ti.itb.ac.id
Published at : 30 Oct 2019
Volume : IJtech
Vol 10, No 5 (2019)
DOI : https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v10i5.2165
Sutalaksana, I.Z., Zakiyah, S.Z.Z., Widyanti, A. 2019. Linking Basic Human Values, Risk Perception, Risk Behavior and Accident Rates: The Road to Occupational Safety. International Journal of Technology. Volume 10(5), pp. 918-929
| Iftikar Zahedi Sutalaksana | Department of Industrial Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung Labtek 3 Ganesa 10 Bandung 40132 Indonesia |
| Siti Zsa Zsa Zakiyah | Department of Industrial Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung Labtek 3 Ganesa 10 Bandung 40132 Indonesia |
| Ari Widyanti | Department of Industrial Engineering, Institut Teknologi Bandung Labtek 3 Ganesa 10 Bandung 40132 Indonesia |
To improve occupational safety, it is
necessary to consider both management and individual approaches. The individual
approach includes internal factors such as basic human values, risk perception,
risk behavior and experience of accidents; the aim of this study is to observe
the link between these. 104 workers from the forging and casting department of
an Indonesian military tools manufacturer participated voluntarily in the
study. They were asked to complete a set of questionnaires, consisting of a
portrait value questionnaire to assess personal basic human values, a risk
perception and safety questionnaire to assess risk perception and risk behavior,
and a self-reported accident questionnaire. Structural Equation Modelling (SEM)
and bivariate correlation were applied to observe the links between basic human
values, risk perception, risk behavior and accident rates. The results show
that the basic human value that influences risk perception is that of power.
Risk perception correlates with risk behavior, and risk behavior correlates
with accident rates. The implications of the results are that occupational
safety can be achieved through individual approaches based on basic human
values and risk perception.
Accidents; Basic human value; Risk behavior; Risk perception; SEM
Safety issues are given high priority in many industries. Safety is not
only related to the absence of accidents and minimization of risk, but can also
be seen as an important factor in work quality (Hollnagel, 2004), which will
eventually affect the performance of industries as a whole. In fact, all
efforts to enhance occupational safety have a common objective to not only
minimize accidents, but also to minimize risk. If risk can be minimized, it can
be expected that accidents will also be reduced. Therefore, research has been
more focused on risk minimization.
Risk can be
defined as the possibility of physical, social or financial harm or loss due to
a hazard or uncertainty about outcomes (Rohrmann, 2005). McGregor (2006) also
states that risk is a person’s probable exposure to loss, harm or damage.
Within the two definitions, risk is described in the context of two components:
severity (which results from the occurrence of hazard), and the probability of
a hazard occurring (Lehman et al., 2009). Therefore, occupational safety
efforts are concentrated on reducing both the severity and probability of risk
(e.g., Muñoz et al., 2017).
Considering the importance of safety, industries put considerable efforts into improving safety in the workplace. Such efforts fall in two common areas: engineering controls (including design installation, inspection and repair (Khowaja et al., 2016; da Costa et al., 2018)), and written systems (including policies, procedures, rules and audit programs (Widyanti et al., 2018)). Considering the importance of safety, industries put considerable efforts into improving safety in the workplace. However, accidents still happen in industry, implying the need for understanding of more than the engineering aspects and written systems (Mearns et al., 2003; Laurence, 2005; Liu et al., 2015).
To reduce both the
severity and probability of risk, as described earlier, different approaches to
the engineering aspect and written system are gaining more attention. The most discussed
approach in this case is the behavioral approach (Siregar et al., 2015;
Widyanti and Talha, 2017; Zuraida et al., 2017; Widyanti and Sutanto, 2017;
Widyanti et al., 2018). Behavior related to risk is known as risk behavior.
Rundmo et al. (2011) define it as the extent to which employees ignore safety
regulations in order to get a job done or break rules or procedures to complete
a job quickly. In some research, the risk behavior approach in relation to
safety (also known as behavior-based safety) has been proven to be successful
when implemented in the context of risk management and injury prevention (see
for example Geller, 2005).
Improving risk
behavior is greatly influenced by the lens through which individuals view the risk
objective or risk perception (Oppong, 2015). Risk perception can be defined as
a person’s judgment (including their opinions and beliefs) of the risk
associated with a hazard, and as awareness of hazards and the probability of incurring
harm (Slovic, 2010). Risk perception falls into the category of subjective risk
(i.e., perceived risk), but it must be underlined that risk itself (i.e.,
objective risk) exists whether people are aware of it or not, and regardless of
whether they are concerned about it. Thus, risk perception is not free from
bias, and biased risk perception can cause misjudgements of objective risk,
which may affect risk behavior.
Risk perception
research has gained more attention as part of risk and safety management. Theories
on risk perception and the implications for accident prevention have been developed,
for example the risk preference theory and risk homeostasis theory (Oppong,
2015). Risk preference theory states that people have a natural predisposition
towards risk that is determined by their personality (Gallagher, 2005), gender,
age and cultural settings (Rohrmann, 2005; Nordenstedt & Ivanisevic, 2010),
and their basic human values and beliefs (Rundmo et al. 2011). On the other
hand, homeostasis theory states that humans have a bearable level of
comfortable risk and can adjust their behavior according to this bearable
level. If risk is perceived as being greater than the bearable level, they will
adjust their behavior to lower the risk, and vice versa. Based on the two
theories, it can be underlined that risk perception plays an important role in
accident prevention. Furthermore, Rundmo et al. (2011) propose three possible approaches
to the relation between risk behavior and accidents, namely that accidents may result
in risk perception; risk perception may cause accidents; and risk perception
and accidents are both endogenous variables which are independent of each
other.
Some research has hypothesized
that the perception of occupational risk factors will affect safety behavior
(e.g., Rundmo et al. 2011). In addition, Nordenstedt & Ivanisevic (2010)
state that having better knowledge of risk perception can improve the quality
of decision making in safety and lower the impact such decisions. Furthermore, other
research has investigated the influence of risk perception on safety behavior
(Brewer et al. 2004; Arezes & Miguel, 2008; Lund & Rundmo, 2009), with
mixed results.
Risk perception is influenced by several factors. Recent research has underlined the importance of considering basic human values in risk perception. Schwartz et al. (2012) define basic human values as trans-situational goals, which vary in importance, and serve as guiding principles in the lives of individuals or groups. In addition, many researchers have proposed that basic human values function as standards that guide thought and action (Rohan, 2000; Feather, 2002).Considering the importance of the constructs discussed above (i.e., basic human values, risk perception and risk behavior) in occupational safety, only partial and limited studies have been conducted to observe the relation between these, in particular the relation between the fundamental construct (i.e., basic human values) and the others. Study of basic human values and their relation with accidents is crucial as part of the effort to reduce occupational accidents, since, as stated previously, basic human values will guide thought (as well as risk perception in this case) and actions. Risk perception and actions in the workplace will influence safety behavior and accidents. It would appear that only Nordenstedt and Ivanisevic (2010) have observed the relation between basic human values and risk perception in disaster management. Brewer et al. (2004) and Reniers et al. (2016) found a relation between risk perception and risk behavior in the healthcare system, however only limited studies have been conducted in the industrial setting. One example is the work of Rundmo et al. (2011), who studied risk perceptions and occupational accidents in the oil industry and gave a causal description of the relationship between the two variables.
The purpose of this study is to observe the
relation between personal basic human values, risk perception, risk behavior,
and experience of accidents. It is hypothesized that basic human values play a
role in risk perception. Risk perception will influence risk behavior, which
will subsequently influence the experience of accidents. Figure 1 shows the proposed
model for the relation between basic human values, risk perception, risk
behavior, and experience of accidents. A
clear picture of the overall construct is expected to provide a valuable
approach to behavior-based safety as a means of ensuring occupational safety.
The aim of the study was to
observe the link between basic human values, risk perception, risk behavior,
and accident rates. Partial correlation shows that there are correlations
between basic human values (i.e. power) and risk perception, between risk
perception and risk behavior, and between risk behavior and accident. Thus, the results
of the study show that occupational safety can be obtained through individual
approaches based on basic human values and risk perception.
Arezes, P., Miguel, A.S., 2008. Risk Perception and Safety Behavior: A Study in an
Occupational Environment. Safety Science,
Volume 46, pp. 900?907
Brewer, N.T., Weinstein,
N.D., Cuite, C.I. Herrington, J.E., 2004.
Risk Perceptions and Their Relation to Behavior. Annals of Behavioral
Medicine, Volume 27(2),
pp. 125?130
Chang, H., Chen, S.W., 2008. The Impact of Online Store Environment Cues on Purchase Intention: Trust
and Perceived Risk as a Mediator. Online
Information Review, Volume 32(60),
pp. 818?841
da Costa, D.G.N., Malkhamah, S., Suparma,
L.B., 2018. Use of the Safety Factor and Margin of
Safety in Motorcyclist Accident Risk Management. International
Journal of Technology, Volume 9, pp. 737?750
Dake, K., 1991. Orienting
Dispositions in the Perception of
Risk: An Analysis of Contemporary Worldviews
and Cultural Biases. Journal of Cross-cultural
Psychology, Volume
22(1), pp. 61?82
Das, T.K., Teng, B-S., 2001. A Risk Perception Model of Alliance Structuring.
Journal of International Management, Volume 7(1), pp. 1?29
Feather, N.T.,
2002. Values and Value Dilemmas in Relation
to Judgments Concerning Outcomes of an Industrial Conflict. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,
Volume 28(4),
pp. 446?459
Gallagher, M.E.,
2005. High Rolling Leaders: The Big Five Model of Personality and
Risk Taking During War. In: International
Studies Association-South Conference
Geller, E.S.,
2005. Behavior-based Safety and Occupational Risk Management. Behavior Modification, Volume
29(3), pp. 529?561
Gonçalves, S.M.P., da Silva, S.A.,
Lima, M.L., Melia, J.L., 2008. The Impact of Work Accidents Experience on Causal Attributions and Worker Behaviour. Safety Science, Volume 46(6), pp. 992?1001
Gyekye, S.A.,
2006. Workers’ Perception of Workplace Safety:
An African Perspective. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics: JOSE, Volume
12(1), pp. 31?42
Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., 2017. A Primer on Partial
Least Squares Structural
Equation Modeling. 2nd
Edition. Thousands Oaks: Sage
Hollnagel, E.,
2004. Barriers and Accident Prevention. 1st Edition. London: Routledge.
Johnson, A., Widyanti, A., 2011. Cultural Influence on the Measurement of Mental
Workload. Ergonomics, Volume 54(6), pp. 509?518
Khanzode, V.V., Maiti, J., Ray, P.K., 2012. Occupational Injury and Accident
Research: A Comprehensive Review.
Safety Science, Volume 50(5),
pp. 1355?1267
Khowaja, S.A., Prabono, A.G., Setiawan, F., Yahya,
B.N., Lee, S., 2016. An Effective
Threshold Based Measurement Technique for
Fall Detection using Smart Devices. International Journal of Industrial
Engineering: Theory, Applications and Practice, Volume 23(5), pp.
332–348
Kouabenan, D.R., Dubois, M., De Gaudemaris, R.,
Scarnato, F., Mallaret. M.R., 2007.
Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus
Aureus Risk Perception by Healthcare Personnel in a Public
Hospital. Social Behavior and Personality an
International Journal, Volume 35(1),
pp. 89–100
Laurence, D., 2005. Safety Rules and Regulations
on Mine Sites:
The Problem
and a Solution.
Journal of Safety Research, Volume 36(1), pp. 39–50
Lehmann, C.C., Haight, J.M., Michael, J.H., 2009. Effects of Safety Training on Risk Tolerance: An
Examination of Male Workers in the Surface Mining Industry. Journal of Safety Health and Enviromental
Research Archive, Volume 6(1), pp. 1–22
Leiter, M.P., Zanaletti,
W., Argentero, P., 2009. Occupational Risk
Perception, Safety Training, and
Injury Prevention: Testing a Model in the Italian Printing Industry. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, Volume 14(1),
pp. 1–10
Liu, X., Huang, G., Huang, H., Wang, S., Xiao, Y.,
Chen, W., 2015. Safety Climate, Safety Behavior, and Worker
Injuries in the Chinese. Safety Science, Volume 78, pp. 173–178
Lund, I.O., Rundmo, T., 2009. Cross-cultural Comparisons of Traffic
Safety, Risk Perception,
Attitudes and Behaviour. Safety
Science, Volume 47(4), pp. 547–553
McGregor, S.L.T.,
2006. Reconceptualizing Risk Perception: Perceiving Majority World Citizens at Risk from 'Northern' Consumption. International Journal of Consumer Studies. Volume 30(3), pp. 235–246
Mearns, K., Whitaker, S.M., Flin, R., 2003.
Safety Climate, Safety Management Practice and Safety Performance in Offshore Environment. Safety Science, Volume 41(8), pp. 641–680
Muñoz, M., Palacios, C., Echegaray, M., Rodriguez, R.,
2017. Risk Analysis of Agro-industrial Wastes Gasification in Fluidized Bed. International
Journal of Industrial Engineering: Theory, Applications and Practice, Volume 24(5), pp. 542–555
Muzikante, I., Renge, V., 2011. Attitude Function as a
Moderator in Values-attitudes-behavior Relations. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 30, pp. 1003–1008
Ngueutsa, R., Kouabenan, D.R., 2016. Accident History,
Risk Perception and Traffic Safe Behaviour. Ergonomics, Volume 60(9), pp. 1273 –1282
Nordenstedt, H., Ivanisevic, J., 2010. Values in Risk Perception-studying the Relationship
between Values and Risk Perception
in Three Countries.
Journal of Disaster Risk Studies, Volume 3, pp. 1–11
Oppong, S., 2015., Risk Chain Process Model: Linking Risk Perception to Occupational Accidents. Sigurnost, Volume 57(1), pp.
25–34
Park, C., Jun, J-K., 2003. A Cross-cultural
Comparison of Internet Buying Behavior: Effect
of Internet Usage, Perceived Risks, and Innovativeness. International
Marketing Review, Volume 20,
pp. 534–553
Reniers, R.L.E.P.,
Murphy, L., Lin A., Bartolome, S.P., Wood, S.J., 2016. Risk Perception
and Risk-taking Behavior during
Adolescence: The Influence of Personality
and Gender. PLoS
ONE, Volume
11(4), pp. 1–14
Rohan, M.J., 2000.
A Rose by Any Name? The Values Construct. Personality and Social Psychology Review,
Volume 4(3),
pp. 255–277
Rohrmann, B., 2005.
Risk Attitude Scales: Concepts, Questionnaires, Utilizations. Project Report.
University of Melbourne, Australia
Rundmo,
T., Nordfjærn, T., Iversen,
H.H., Oltedal, S. Jørgensen,
S.H., 2011. The Role of Risk
Perception in Transportation Mode Use. Safety Science, Volume 49(2), pp. 226–235
Schermelleh-Engel, K., Moosbrugger, H., 2003. Evaluating
the Fit of Structural Equation Models: Tests of Significance and Descriptive Goodness-of-fit Measures. Methods
of Psychological Research Online, Volume 8(8), pp. 23–74
Schwartz, S.H., Melech, G., Lehmann, A., Burgess, S.,
Harris, M., Owens, V., 2001. Extending the Cross-cultural Validity of the Theory of Basic
Human Values with a Different Method of Measurement. Journal
of Cross Cultural Psychology, Volume
32(5), pp. 519–542
Schwartz, S.H., Cieciuch, J., Vecchione, M., Dayidov, E., Fischer, R., Beierlein, C.,
Ramos, A., Verkasalo, M., Lönnqvist, J-E., Demirutku, K., Irilen-gumus,
O., Konty, M., 2012.
Personality Process and Individual Differences:
Refining the Theory of Basic Individual
Values. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
Volume 103(4), pp.
663–688
Siregar, M.L., Alawiyah, T., Tjahjono, T., 2015.
Remedial Safety Treatment of Accident-prone
Locations. International Journal of
Technology, Volume 6(4), pp.
680–688
Slimak, M., Dietz, T., 2006. Personal Values, Beliefs, and Ecological Risk Perception. Risk Analysis, Volume 26(6), pp. 1689–1705
Slovic, P., 2010. The
Feeling of Risk: New Perspectives on Risk Perception. Earthscan, London
Weinstein, N.D., 1989.
Effects of Personal Experience on Self-protective
Behavior. Psychological Bulletin, Volume 105(1),
pp. 31–50
Widyanti, A., Octaviana, I., Yamin, P., 2018. Safety Climate, Safety Behavior and Accident Experience: Case of Indonesian Oil and Gas Company. Industrial
Engineering and Management System Journal, Volume 171,
pp. 128–135
Widyanti, A., Sutanto, F., 2017. Correlation between
Type-A Personality and Risky
Driving Behavior. Journal
of Engineering and Applied Sciences,
Volume 12(13),
pp. 3362–3366
Widyanti, A., Talha, F.A., 2017. Improving Occupational Safety
through Worker’s Personality
Approach. Journal of Engineering and Applied Science, Volume 12(12), pp. 3262–3266
Zuraida, R., Iridiastadi,
H., Sutalaksana, I.Z., 2017. Indonesian Drivers’
Characteristics Associated with Road
Accidents. International Journal of
Technology, Volume 8(2), pp. 311–319