45
Views
1
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Articles

A situational analysis of how barriers to systemic failure are undermined during accident sequences

, &
Pages 811-826 | Published online: 15 Apr 2011

REFERENCES

  • Andrews, J. D. and Moss, T. R. (1993) Reliability and Risk Assessment, Harlow: Longman.
  • Bainbridge, L. (1983) Ironies of automation, Automatica 19, 775–79.
  • Blockley, D. I. (1996) Hazard engineering, in C. Hood and D. K. C. Jones (eds) Accident and Design: Contemporary Debates in Risk Management, pp. 31–9. London: UCL Press.
  • Busby, J. S. (1999) The effectiveness of collective retrospection as a mechanism of organisational learning, Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 35, 109–29.
  • Ersdale, G. (2002) On the safety of fixed offshore structures, failure paths and barriers, 21st Internationl Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Oslo, 23–28 June.
  • Feldman, J. M. (1981) Beyond attribution theory: cognitive processes in performance appraisal, Journal of Applied Psychology 66, 127–48.
  • Fischhoff, B., Lichtenstein, S., Slovic, P., Derby, S. L. and Keeney, R. L. (1981) Acceptable Risk, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Grabowski, M., Merrick, J. R., Harrald, J. R., Mazzuchi, T. A. and van Dorp, J. R. (2000) Risk modelling in distributed, large scale systems, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part A, 30, 651–60.
  • Kanse, L. and van der Schaaf, T. (2001) Recovery of failures in the chemical process industry, in D. Harris (ed.) Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics, Vol. 6, pp. 323–32. Aldershot: Ashgate.
  • Kecklund, L. J., Edland, A., Wedin, P. and Svenson, O. (1996) Safety barrier function analysis in a process industry: a nuclear power application, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 17, 275–84.
  • Kvitrud, A., Ersdale, G. and Leonhardsen, R. L. (2001) On the risk of structural failure on Norwegian offshore installations, Proceedings 11th International Offshore and Polar Engineering Conference, Stavanger, 17–22 June, pp. 459–64.
  • Lave, J. (1988) Cognition in Practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Norman, D. A. (1988) The Psychology of Everyday Things, New York: Basic Books.
  • Norman, D. A. (1992) Design principles for cognitive artefacts, Research in Engineering Design 4, 43–50.
  • Marras W, Ferguson S, Gupta P et al. The quantification of low back disorder using motion measures: methodlogy and validation. Spine 1999; 24: 2091-2100.
  • Perrow, C. (1984) Normal Accidents – Living with High-Risk Technologies, New York: Basic Books.
  • Rasmussen, J. (1990) The role of error in organizing behaviour, Ergonomics, 33, 1185–200.
  • Reason, J. (1990) Human Error, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Reason J. (1997) Managing the Risks of Organisational Accidents, Aldershot: Ashgate.
  • Sarter, N. B. and Woods, D. D. (1995) How in the world did we ever get into that mode? Mode error and awareness in supervisory control, Human Factors 37, 5–19.
  • Selig, R. (2002) Use of safety barrier diagrams in offshore QRA in Denmark, FABIG Newsletter of the Steel Construction Institute Issue 31, January, 20–2.
  • Suchman, L. A. (1987) Plans and Situated Actions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Svenson, O. (1991) The Accident Evolution and Barrier (AEB) model applied to incident analysis in the processing industries, Risk Analysis 11, 499–507.
  • Svenson, O., Lekberg, A. and Johansson, A. E. L. (1999) On perspective, expertise and differences in accident analyses: arguments for a multidisciplinary integrated approach, Ergonomics 42, 1561–71.
  • Turner, B. A. (1978) Man Made Disasters, London: Wykeham.
  • Wagenaar, W. A., Hudson, P. T. W. and Reason, J. T. (1990) Cognitive failure and accidents, Applied Cognitive Psychology 4, 272–94.
  • Wickens, C. D. (1992) Engineering Psychology and Human Performance, second editon, New York: HarperCollins.
  • Wilde, G. J. S. (1982) The theory of risk homeostasis: implications for safety and health, Risk Analysis 2, 209–25.
  • Wohl J. (1983) Cognitive capability versus system complexity in electronic maintenance, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 13, 624–6.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.