A fuzzy causal relational mapping and rough set-based model for context-specific human error rate estimation

References

• Bennett JD, Passmore DL. Probability of death, disability, and restricted work activity in United States underground bituminous coal mines, 1975–1981. J Safety Res. 1984;15:69–76. doi: 10.1016/0022-4375(84)90003-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trager TA Jr. Case study report on loss of system safety function events. Washington (DC): United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission; 1985. (Report No. AEOD/C504).
   Google Scholar
• Rimmington J. Annual report of the health and safety executive. London: HMSO; 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Bradley Chadwell G, Leverenz FL, Rose SE, et al. Contribution of human factors to incidents in the petroleum refining industry. Process Saf Prog. 1999;18:206–210. doi: 10.1002/prs.680180407
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirotsu Y, Suzuki K, Kojima M, et al. Multivariate analysis of human error incidents occurring at nuclear power plants: several occurrence patterns of observed human errors. Cogn Technol Work. 2001;3:82–91. doi: 10.1007/PL00011526
   Google Scholar
• Hobbs A, Williamson A. Associations between errors and contributing factors in aircraft maintenance. Hum Factors J Hum Factors Ergon Soc. 2003;45:186–201. doi: 10.1518/hfes.45.2.186.27244
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boeing Commercial Airplanes. Statistical summary of commercial jet airplane accidents [Internet]. Seattle (WA): Boeing Commercial Airplanes; 2015 [cited 2017 Sep 2]. Available from: http://www.boeing.com/commercial/safety/investigate.html
   Google Scholar
• Ung S-T, Shen W-M. A novel human error probability assessment using fuzzy modeling. Risk Anal. 2011;31:745–757. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2010.01536.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen H, Qi H, Long R, et al. Research on 10-year tendency of China coal mine accidents and the characteristics of human factors. Saf Sci. 2012;50:745–750. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.08.040
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dash AK, Bhattcharjee RM, Paul PS, et al. Study and analysis of accidents due to wheeled trackless transportation machinery in Indian coal mines – identification of gap in current investigation system. Procedia Earth Planet Sci. 2015;11:539–547. doi: 10.1016/j.proeps.2015.06.056
   Google Scholar
• Mason S. Measuring attitudes to improve electricians’ safety. Min Technol. 1996;78:166–170.
   Google Scholar
• Morgan C. Implementing training programs – operation, maintenance and safety. In: Proceedings of the Cement Industry Technical Conference 1988. May 1988. Quebec City (QC). Piscataway (NJ): IEEE. 1988. p. 221–251.
   Google Scholar
• Ghosh A, Bhattacherjee A. Role of individual characteristics of workers in mine accidents: a case–control study. Minetech. 2003;23:43–48.
   Google Scholar
• Ghosh AK, Bhattacherjee A, Chau N. Relationships of working conditions and individual characteristics to occupational injuries: a case–control study in coal miners. J Occup Health. 2004;46:470–480. doi: 10.1539/joh.46.470
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maiti J. Injury epidemiology – the concept and its application in mining. J Mines Met Fuels. 2005;53:147–154.
   Google Scholar
• Maiti J. Risk assessment and safety evaluation of mining system. J Inst Eng India. 2005;85:33–41.
   Google Scholar
• Paul PS, Maiti J, Dasgupta S, et al. An epidemiological study of injury in mines: implications for safety promotion. Int J Inj Contr Saf Promot. 2005;12:157–165. doi: 10.1080/15660970500088763
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bhattacherjee A, Bertrand J-P, Meyer J-P, et al. Relationships of physical job tasks and living conditions with occupational injuries in coal miners. Ind Health. 2007;45:352–358. doi: 10.2486/indhealth.45.352
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ghosh AK, Bhattacherjee A. Predictors of occupational injuries among coal miners: causal analysis. Trans Inst Mining Metall. A Mining Technol. 2007;116:16–24. doi: 10.1179/174328607X161879
   Google Scholar
• Paul PS, Maiti J. The role of behavioral factors on safety management in underground mines. Saf Sci. 2007;45:449–471. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2006.07.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verma S, Chaudhari S. Safety of workers in Indian mines: study, analysis, and prediction. Saf Health Work. 2017;8:267–275. doi: 10.1016/j.shaw.2017.01.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hannaman GW, Spurgin AJ. Systematic human action reliability procedure (SHARP). Vienna: International Atomic Energy Agency; 1984. Interim Report (No. Epri NP-3583).
   Google Scholar
• Swain A. Accident sequence evaluation program: human reliability analysis procedure. Washington (DC): Sandia National Labs, Nuclear Regulatory Commission; 1987. p. 1–170. ( NUREG/CR-4772).
   Google Scholar
• Hollnagel E. Human reliability analysis: context and control. London (UK): Academic Press; 1993.
   Google Scholar
• Hollnagel E. Cognitive reliability and error analysis method (CREAM). Amsterdam: Elsevier; 1998.
   Google Scholar
• Barnes MJ, Bley D, Cooper S. Technical basis and implementation guidelines for a technique for human event analysis (ATHEANA). Washington (DC): Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research; 2000. (NUREG-1624, Rev.)
   Google Scholar
• Reer B, Dang VN, Hirschberg S. The CESA method and its application in a plant-specific pilot study on errors of commission. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 2004;83:187–205. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2003.09.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim JW, Jung W, Park J. A systematic approach to analysing errors of commission from diagnosis failure in accident progression. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 2005;89:137–150. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2004.08.021
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swain AD, Guttmann HE. Handbook of human reliability analysis with emphasis on nuclear power plant applications: final report. Washington (DC): US Nuclear Regulatory Commission; 1983. (NUREG/CR-1278).
   Google Scholar
• Williams JC. HEART – a proposed method for assessing and reducing human error. In: Proceedings of the 9th Advances in Reliability Technology Symposium. Bradford: University of Bradford; 1986. p. B3/R/1–B3/R/13.
   Google Scholar
• Embrey DE, Humphreys P, Rosa EA, et al. SLIM-MAUD: an approach to assessing human error probabilities using structured expert judgment, volume 2: detailed analysis of the technical issues. Upton (NY): Brookhaven National Laboratory; 1984. (NUREG/CR-3518).
   Google Scholar
• Rankin WL. The maintenance error decision aid (Media) process. In: Proceedings of the IEA 2000/HFES 2000 Congress, San Diego, California, USA. Vol. 3. Santa Monica (CA): Human Factors and Ergonomic Society; 2000. p. 795–798.
   Google Scholar
• Kirwan B. A resources flexible approach to human reliability assessment for PRA. In: Proceedings of the Safety and Reliability Symposium; September; Altrincham. London (UK): Elsevier; 1990. p. 114–135.
   Google Scholar
• Bertolini M. Assessment of human reliability factors: a fuzzy cognitive maps approach. Int J Ind Ergon. 2007;37:405–413. doi: 10.1016/j.ergon.2005.12.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Konstandinidou M, Nivolianitou Z, Kiranoudis C, et al. A fuzzy modeling application of CREAM methodology for human reliability analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 2006;91:706–716. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2005.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marseguerra M, Zio E, Librizzi M. Human reliability analysis by fuzzy ‘CREAM’. Risk Anal. 2007;27:137–154. doi: 10.1111/j.1539-6924.2006.00865.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zio E, Baraldi P, Librizzi M, et al. A fuzzy set-based approach for modeling dependence among human errors. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 2009;160:1947–1964. doi: 10.1016/j.fss.2009.01.016
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li P-c, Chen G-h, Dai L-c, et al. Fuzzy logic-based approach for identifying the risk importance of human error. Saf Sci. 2010;48:902–913. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2010.03.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ung ST, Williams V, Chen HS, et al. Human error assessment and management in port operations using fuzzy AHP. Mar Technol Soc J. 2006;40:73–86. doi: 10.4031/002533206787353583
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiegmann D, Shappell S. A human error approach to aviation accident analysis: the human factors analysis and classification system. Bodmin: Ashgate; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Rasmussen J, Duncan K, Leplat J, editors. New technology and human error. Chichester: Wiley; 1987.
   Google Scholar
• Reason J. Human error. Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press; 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Wang A, Luo Y, Tu G, et al. Quantitative evaluation of human-reliability based on fuzzy-clonal selection. IEEE Trans Reliab. 2011;60:517–527. doi: 10.1109/TR.2011.2161031
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hansen CP. A causal model of the relationship among accidents, biodata, personality, and cognitive factors. J Appl Psychol. 1989;74:81–90. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.74.1.81
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iverson RD, Erwin PJ. Predicting occupational injury: the role of affectivity. J Occup Organ Psychol. 1997;70:113–128. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1997.tb00637.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bley D. New methods for human reliability analysis. Environ Manag Heal. 2002;13:277–289. doi: 10.1108/09566160210431079
   Google Scholar
• Fujita Y, Hollnagel E. Failures without errors: quantification of context in HRA. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 2004;83:145–151. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2003.09.006
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Čepin M. DEPEND-HRA – a method for consideration of dependency in human reliability analysis. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 2008;93:1452–1460. doi: 10.1016/j.ress.2007.10.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oppenheim I, Shinar D. A context-sensitive model of driving behaviour and its implications for in-vehicle safety systems. Cogn Technol Work. 2012;14:261–281. doi: 10.1007/s10111-011-0178-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taga H, Furuta K, Kanno T. Human reliability analysis of car drivers in urban intersections. Cogn Technol Work. 2012;14:365–377. doi: 10.1007/s10111-011-0185-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aju Kumar VN, Gandhi MS, Gandhi OP. Identification and assessment of factors influencing human reliability in maintenance using fuzzy cognitive maps. Qual Reliab Eng Int. 2015;31:169–181. doi: 10.1002/qre.1569
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antonovsky A, Pollock C, Straker L. Identification of the human factors contributing to maintenance failures in a petroleum operation. Hum Factors. 2014;56:306–321. doi: 10.1177/0018720813491424
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersson D, Rankin A, Diptee D. Approaches to team performance assessment: a comparison of self-assessment reports and behavioral observer scales. Cogn Technol Work. 2017;19:517–528. doi: 10.1007/s10111-017-0428-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pawlak Z. Rough sets. Int J Comput Inf Sci. 1982;11:341–356. doi: 10.1007/BF01001956
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walczak B, Massart DL. Rough sets theory. Chemom Intell Lab Syst. 1999;47:1–16. doi: 10.1016/S0169-7439(98)00200-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pawlak Z. Vagueness – a rough set view. In: Mycielski J, Rozenberg G, Salomaa A, editors. Structures in logic and computer science. Berlin: Springer; 1997. p. 106–117.
   Google Scholar
• Pawlak Z. Rough sets and intelligent data analysis. Inf Sci (N Y). 2002;147:1–12. doi: 10.1016/S0020-0255(02)00197-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pawlak Z. Rough sets. Dordrecht: Springer; 1991.
   Google Scholar
• Song W, Ming X, Wu Z, et al. A rough TOPSIS approach for failure mode and effects analysis in uncertain environments. Qual Reliab Eng Int. 2014;30:473–486. doi: 10.1002/qre.1500
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schutte PC. How to make the most of your human: design considerations for human–machine interactions. Cogn Technol Work. 2017;19:233–249. doi: 10.1007/s10111-017-0418-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar