A model for establishing resilience safety culture for the construction industry

References

• Zhao XH, Cheng WC, Shen JS, et al. Platform collapse incident of a power plant in Jiangxi, China. Nat Hazards. 2017;87:1259–1265. doi:10.1007/s11069-017-2800-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang JS, Zhang WY, Xu PH, et al. Applicability of accident analysis methods to Chinese construction accidents. J Safety Res. 2019;68:187–196. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2018.11.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ahmed S. Causes and effects of accident at construction site: a study for the construction industry in Bangladesh. IJSCET. 2019;10(2):18–40. doi:10.30880/ijscet.2019.10.02.003
   Google Scholar
• Marshall TM. Risk perception and safety culture: tools for improving the implementation of disaster risk reduction strategies. Int J Disast Risk Re. 2020;47:101557, doi:10.1016/j.ijdrr.2020.101557
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohammadi A, Tavakolan M, Khosravi Y. Developing safety archetypes of construction industry at project level using system dynamics. J Safety Res. 2018;67:17–26. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2018.09.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Akselsson RA, Koornneef EF, Stewart S, et al. Resilience safety culture in aviation organisations. In: 17th World Congress on Ergonomics. Zurich: International Ergonomics Association; 2009 August 9–14; Beijing, China. p. 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• Trinh MT, Feng YB, Jin XH, et al. Conceptual model for developing resilient safety culture in the construction environment. J Constr Eng M. 2018;144(7):1–5. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001522
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen YT, McCabe B, Hyatt D. A resilience safety climate model predicting construction safety performance. Saf Sci. 2018;109:434–445. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2018.07.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leveson N, Dulac N, David Z, et al. Engineering resilience into safety-critical systems. Aldershot: Ashgate; 2006. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284761545_Engineering_resilience_into_safety-critical_systems
   Google Scholar
• Shirali GA, Motamedzade M, Mohammadfam I, et al. Assessment of resilience engineering factors based on system properties in a process industry. Cogn Technol Work. 2016;18:19–31. doi:10.1007/s10111-015-0343-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trinh MT, Feng YB, Mohamed S. Framework for measuring resilient safety culture in Vietnam’s construction environment. J Constr Eng M. 2019;145(2):1–12. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001602
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peñaloza GA, Saurin TA, Formoso CT, et al. A resilience engineering perspective of safety performance measurement systems: a systematic literature review. Saf Sci. 2020;130:104864. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104864
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reason J. Human error. New York (NY): Cambridge University Press; 1990.
   Google Scholar
• Feng YB, Trinh MT. Developing resilient safety culture for construction projects. J Constr Eng M. 2019;145(11):1–15. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0001720
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Larouzee J, Coze JL. Good and bad reasons: the Swiss cheese model and its critics. Saf Sci. 2020;126:104660. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.10.4660
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moura R, Beer M, Lewis J, et al. Learning from accidents: analysis and representation of human errors in multi-attribute events. In: 12th International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Civil Engineering; July 12–15. 2015; Vancouver, Canada: University of British Columbia Library; 2015. p. 1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Michael GL, Paul MS, Charles C, et al. A systems approach to accident causation in mining: an application of the HFACS method. Accident Anal Prev. 2012;48:111–117. doi:10.1016/j.aap.2011.05.026
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang J, Fan YX, Gao Y. Revising HFACS for SMEs in the chemical industry: HFACS–CSMEs. J Loss Prevent Proc. 2020;65:104138. doi:10.1016/j.jlp.2020.104138
   Google Scholar
• Weick KE, Sutcliffe KM, Obstfeld D. Organizing for high reliability: processes of collective mindfulness. In: B Arjen, editor. Vol. 1 of Research in Organizational Behavior. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE; 1999. p. 81–123.
   Google Scholar
• Khakzad N, Khan F, Amyotte P, et al. Dynamic risk analysis using bow-tie approach. Reliab Eng Syst Safe. 2012;104:36–44. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2012.04.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferdous R, Khan F, Sadiq R, et al. Analyzing system safety and risks under uncertainty using a bow-tie diagram: an innovative approach. Process Saf Environ. 2013;91(1–2):1–18. doi:10.1016/j.psep.2011.08.010
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ranasinghe U, Jefferies M, Davis P, et al. Resilience engineering indicators and safety management: a systematic review. Saf Health Work. 2020;11(2):127–135. doi:10.1016/j.shaw.2020.03.009
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tucker S, Chmiel N, Turner N, et al. Perceived organizational support for safety and employee safety voice: the mediating role of coworker support for safety. J Occup Health Psychol. 2008;13(4):319–330. doi:10.1037/1076-89.98.13.4.319
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newaz MT, Davis P, Jefferie M, et al. Using a psychological contract of safety to predict safety climate on construction sites. J Safety Res. 2019;68:9–19. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2018.10.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kwon YT, Son SY, Kim SK, et al. Worker safety perception analysis of South Korean construction sites. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2021;27(2):488–496. doi:10.1080/10803548.2019.1603709
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shirali G, Mohammadfam I. A new method for quantitative assessment of resilience engineering by PCA and NT approach: a case study in a process industry. Reliab Eng Syst Safe. 2013;119:88–94. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2013.05.003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lei PW, Wu Q. Introduction to structural equation modeling: issues and practical considerations. Educ Meas-Issues Pra. 2007;26(3):33–43. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3992.2007.00099.x
   Google Scholar
• Hair JF, Sarstedt M. Factors versus composites: guidelines for choosing the right structural equation modeling method. Proj Manag J. 2019;50(6):619–624. doi:10.1177/8756972819882132
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hair JF, Hult T G, Ringle CM. Mirror, mirror on the wall: a comparative evaluation of composite-based structural equation modeling methods. J Acad Market Sci. 2017;45:616–632. doi:10.1007/s11747-017-0517-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asparouhov T, Muthén B. Exploratory structural equation modeling. Struct Equ Modeling. 2009;16(3):397–438. doi:10.1080/10705510903008204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maydeu-Olivares A, Shi D, Rosseel Y. Instrumental variables two-stage least squares (2SLS) vs. maximum likelihood structural equation modeling of causal effects in linear regression models. Struct Equ Modeling. 2019;26(6):876–892. doi:10.1080/10705511.2019.1607740
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenny DA, McCoach DB. Effect of the number of variables on measures of fit in structural equation modeling. Struct Equ Modeling. 2003;10(3):333–351. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM1003_1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Santos PM, Cirillo MA. Construction of the average variance extracted index for construct validation in structural equation models with adaptive regressions. Commun Stat-Simul C. 2021;2(5):1–12. doi:10.1080/03610918.2021.1888122
   Google Scholar
• Ahmad S, Zulkurnain N, Khairushalimi FI. Assessing the validity and reliability of a measurement model in structural equation modeling (SEM). J Math Comput Sci. 2016;15(3):1–8. doi:10.9734/BJMCS/2016/25183
   Google Scholar
• Iacobucci D. Everything you always wanted to know about SEM (structural equations modeling) but were afraid to ask. J Conum Psychol. 2009;19(4):673–680. doi:10.1016/j.jcps.2009.09.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nevitt J, Hancock GR. Performance of bootstrapping approaches to model test statistics and parameter standard error estimation in structural equation modeling. Struct Equ Modeling. 2009;8(3):353–377. doi:10.1207/S15328007SEM0803_2
   Google Scholar
• Guneri AF, Gul M, Ozgurler S. A fuzzy AHP methodology for selection of risk assessment methods in occupational safety. Int J Risk Assess Manag. 2015;18(3/4):319–335. doi:10.1504/IJRAM.2015.071222
   Google Scholar
• Ahmed F, Kilic K. Fuzzy analytic hierarchy process: a performance analysis of various algorithms. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 2019;362:110–128. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2018.08.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tesfamariam S, Sadiq R. Risk-based environmental decision-making using fuzzy analytic hierarchy process (F-AHP). Stoch Env Res Risk A. 2006;21:35–50. doi:10.1007/s00477-006-0042-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar