Suppr超能文献

为拉斯穆森事故映射图制定影响因素分类方案:可靠性与有效性评估

Developing a contributing factor classification scheme for Rasmussen's AcciMap: Reliability and validity evaluation.

作者信息

Goode N, Salmon P M, Taylor N Z, Lenné M G, Finch C F

机构信息

Centre for Human Factors and Sociotechnical Systems, Faculty of Arts, Business and Law, University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia.

Centre for Human Factors and Sociotechnical Systems, Faculty of Arts, Business and Law, University of the Sunshine Coast, Australia.

出版信息

Appl Ergon. 2017 Oct;64:14-26. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2017.04.014. Epub 2017 May 8.

Abstract

One factor potentially limiting the uptake of Rasmussen's (1997) Accimap method by practitioners is the lack of a contributing factor classification scheme to guide accident analyses. This article evaluates the intra- and inter-rater reliability and criterion-referenced validity of a classification scheme developed to support the use of Accimap by led outdoor activity (LOA) practitioners. The classification scheme has two levels: the system level describes the actors, artefacts and activity context in terms of 14 codes; the descriptor level breaks the system level codes down into 107 specific contributing factors. The study involved 11 LOA practitioners using the scheme on two separate occasions to code a pre-determined list of contributing factors identified from four incident reports. Criterion-referenced validity was assessed by comparing the codes selected by LOA practitioners to those selected by the method creators. Mean intra-rater reliability scores at the system (M = 83.6%) and descriptor (M = 74%) levels were acceptable. Mean inter-rater reliability scores were not consistently acceptable for both coding attempts at the system level (M = 68.8%; M = 73.9%), and were poor at the descriptor level (M = 58.5%; M = 64.1%). Mean criterion referenced validity scores at the system level were acceptable (M = 73.9%; M = 75.3%). However, they were not consistently acceptable at the descriptor level (M = 67.6%; M = 70.8%). Overall, the results indicate that the classification scheme does not currently satisfy reliability and validity requirements, and that further work is required. The implications for the design and development of contributing factors classification schemes are discussed.

摘要

从业人员在采用拉斯穆森(1997年)的Accimap方法时,一个可能的限制因素是缺乏用于指导事故分析的促成因素分类方案。本文评估了为支持户外主导活动(LOA)从业人员使用Accimap而开发的一种分类方案在评分者内和评分者间的可靠性以及标准参照效度。该分类方案有两个层次:系统层次用14个代码描述行为者、人工制品和活动背景;描述层次将系统层次的代码细分为107个具体的促成因素。该研究让11名LOA从业人员分两次使用该方案,对从四份事故报告中确定的预先设定的促成因素清单进行编码。通过比较LOA从业人员选择的代码与方法创建者选择的代码来评估标准参照效度。系统层次(M = 83.6%)和描述层次(M = 74%)的评分者内可靠性平均得分是可以接受的。系统层次的两次编码尝试的评分者间可靠性平均得分并不都能始终如一地被接受(M = 68.8%;M = 73.9%),描述层次的评分者间可靠性平均得分较低(M = 58.5%;M = 64.1%)。系统层次的标准参照效度平均得分是可以接受的(M = 73.9%;M = 75.3%)。然而,描述层次的得分并不都能始终如一地被接受(M = 67.6%;M = 70.8%)。总体而言,结果表明该分类方案目前不满足可靠性和效度要求,需要进一步开展工作。文中讨论了促成因素分类方案的设计和开发所涉及的问题。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验