J Appl Psychol. 2015 Mar;100(2):498. doi: 10.1037/a0038298.
Reports an error in "A meta-analysis of personality and workplace safety: Addressing unanswered questions" by Jeremy M. Beus, Lindsay Y. Dhanani and Mallory A. McCord (Journal of Applied Psychology, Advance online publication. September 22, 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037916). Table 3 contained formatting errors. Minus signs used to indicate negative statistical estimates within the table were inadvertently changed to m-dashes. All versions of this article have been corrected. (The following abstract of the original article appeared in record 2014-39088-001.) The purpose of this meta-analysis was to address unanswered questions regarding the associations between personality and workplace safety by (a) clarifying the magnitude and meaning of these associations with both broad and facet-level personality traits, (b) delineating how personality is associated with workplace safety, and (c) testing the relative importance of personality in comparison to perceptions of the social context of safety (i.e., safety climate) in predicting safety-related behavior. Our results revealed that whereas agreeableness and conscientiousness were negatively associated with unsafe behaviors, extraversion and neuroticism were positively associated with them. Of these traits, agreeableness accounted for the largest proportion of explained variance in safety-related behavior and openness to experience was unrelated. At the facet level, sensation seeking, altruism, anger, and impulsiveness were all meaningfully associated with safety-related behavior, though sensation seeking was the only facet that demonstrated a stronger relationship than its parent trait (i.e., extraversion). In addition, meta-analytic path modeling supported the theoretical expectation that personality's associations with accidents are mediated by safety-related behavior. Finally, although safety climate perceptions accounted for the majority of explained variance in safety-related behavior, personality traits (i.e., agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism) still accounted for a unique and substantive proportion of the explained variance. Taken together, these results substantiate the value of considering personality traits as key correlates of workplace safety.
报告了 Jeremy M. Beus、Lindsay Y. Dhanani 和 Mallory A. McCord 在《应用心理学杂志》（Applied Psychology）上发表的一篇题为“人格与工作场所安全的元分析：回答未解决的问题”（A meta-analysis of personality and workplace safety: Addressing unanswered questions）中的错误。表 3 存在格式错误。表内用于表示负统计估计的负号被误改为中划线。本文的所有版本均已更正。（原始文章的摘要如下）本元分析旨在通过以下方式解决人格与工作场所安全之间关联的未解决问题：（a）使用广泛和特质层面的人格特质，阐明这些关联的幅度和意义；（b）描述人格与工作场所安全的关联方式；（c）测试人格与对安全的社会环境的感知（即安全氛围）相比，在预测与安全相关的行为时的相对重要性。我们的结果表明，宜人性和尽责性与不安全行为呈负相关，而外向性和神经质与不安全行为呈正相关。在这些特质中，宜人性解释了与安全相关的行为中最大比例的可解释方差，开放性经验与之无关。在特质层面，感觉寻求、利他主义、愤怒和冲动与与安全相关的行为都有意义地相关联，尽管感觉寻求是唯一一种与母特质（即外向性）相比具有更强关系的特质。此外，元分析路径模型支持这样一种理论预期，即人格与事故的关联是通过与安全相关的行为来介导的。最后，尽管安全氛围感知解释了与安全相关的行为中大部分可解释的方差，但人格特质（即宜人性、尽责性、神经质）仍然解释了可解释方差的一个独特且实质性的比例。总之，这些结果证实了将人格特质视为工作场所安全的关键相关因素的价值。
