Prerequisites for learning from accident investigations - A cross-country comparison of national accident investigation boards

Safety Science

Volumn 49, Issue 8-9, 2011, Pages 1238-1245

  Cedergren, Alexander ^a   Petersen, Kurt ^a  

^a LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Accident investigations; Investigation boards; Learning; Multi modal; Railway

Indexed keywords

ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION; INVESTIGATION BOARDS; LEARNING; MULTI-MODAL; RAILWAY;

RAILROAD ACCIDENTS; RAILROADS;

INVESTMENTS;

ARTICLE; COMPETENCE; CONTENT ANALYSIS; GOVERNMENT; HUMAN; INTERVIEW; LEARNING ENVIRONMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; SCANDINAVIA; SYMPTOM; TRAFFIC ACCIDENT; TRAFFIC SAFETY;

EID: 79958135339     PISSN: 09257535     EISSN: 18791042     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.04.005     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Argyris C., Schön D.A. Organizational Learning II: Theory, Method, and Practice 1996, Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Reading, MA.
2. Birkland T.A. Disasters, lessons learned, and fantasy documents. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 2009, 17(3):146-156.
3. Catino M. A review of literature: individual blame vs. organizational function logics in accident analysis. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 2008, 16(1):53-62.
4. Cilliers P. Complexity, deconstruction and relativism. Theory, Culture & Society 2005, 22(5):255-267.
5. Cook R.I., Woods D.D. Distancing through differencing: an obstacle to organizational learning following accidents. Resilience Engineering: Concepts and Precepts 2006, 329-338. Ashgate Publishing Limited, Aldershot. E. Hollnagel, D.D. Woods, N. Leveson (Eds.).
6. Cook R.I., Woods D.D., Miller C. A Tale of Two Stories: Contrasting Views of Patient Safety 1998, National Patient Safety Foundation, Chicago, IL.
7. Le Coze J.-C. Disasters and organisations: from lessons learnt to theorising. Safety Science 2008, 46(1):132-149.
8. Dekker S. Ten Questions About Human Error: A New View of Human Factors and System Safety 2005, CRC Press, New York.
9. Dekker S. The Field Guide to Understanding Human Error 2006, Ashgate Publishing Limited, Aldershot.
10. Directive 2004/49/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on safety on the Community's railways and amending Council Directive 95/18/EC on the licensing of railway undertakings and Directive 2001/14/EC on the allocation of railway infrastructure capacity and the levying of charges for the use of railway infrastructure and safety certification (Railway Safety Directive).
11. Einhorn H.J., Hogarth R.M. Judging probable cause. Psychological Bulletin 1986, 99(1):3-19.
12. ESReDA, 2009. Guidelines for Safety Investigations of Accidents. ESReDA (European Safety Reliability and Data Association).
13. Fischhoff B. Hindsight≠foresight: the effect of outcome knowledge on judgment under uncertainty. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 1975, 1(3):288-299.
14. Freitag M., Hale A. Structure of event analysis. After the Event - From Accident to Organisational Learning 1997, 11-22. Pergamon, Oxford. A. Hale, B. Wilpert, M. Freitag (Eds.).
15. Hollnagel, E., 2002. Understanding accidents - from root causes to performance variability. In: Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE 7th Conference on Human Factors and Power Plants, Scottsdale, Arizona, pp. 1-6.
16. Hollnagel E. Barriers and Accident Prevention 2004, Ashgate, Aldershot.
17. Hollnagel E. Investigation as an impediment to learning. Resilience Engineering Perspectives: Remaining Sensitive to the Possibility of Failure 2008, vol. 1:259-268. Ashgate Publishing Limited, Aldershot.
18. Krippendorff K. Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology 2004, Sage, London.
19. Leveson N. A New Approach to System Safety Engineering. Aeronautics and Astronautics 2002, Masachussets Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
20. Leveson N. A new accident model for engineering safer systems. Safety Science 2004, 42(4):237-270.
21. Leveson N. Applying systems thinking to analyze and learn from events. Safety Science 2011, 49(1):55-64.
22. Lundberg J., Rollenhagen C., Hollnagel E. What-You-Look-For-Is-What-You-Find - The consequences of underlying accident models in eight accident investigation manuals. Safety Science 2009, 47(10):1297-1311.
23. Lundberg J., Rollenhagen C., Hollnagel E. What you find is not always what you fix-How other aspects than causes of accidents decide recommendations for remedial actions. Accident Analysis and Prevention 2010, 42(6):2132-2139.
24. Mingers J., Brocklesby J. Multimethodology: towards a framework for mixing methodologies. Omega, International Journal of Management Science 1997, 25(5):489-509.
25. Rasmussen J. Human error and the problem of causality in analysis of accidents. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 1990, 327:449-460.
26. Rasmussen J. Risk management in a dynamic society: a modelling problem. Safety Science 1997, 27(2/3):183-213.
27. Rasmussen J., Svedung I. Proactive risk management in a dynamic society 2000, Swedish Rescue Services Agency, Karlstad, Sweden.
28. Reason J. The contribution of latent human failures to the breakdown of complex systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences 1990, 327(1241):475-484.
29. Rollenhagen C. Event investigations at nuclear power plants in Sweden: reflections about a method and some associated practices. Safety Science 2011, 49(1):21-26.
30. Sklet S. Comparison of some selected methods for accident investigation. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2004, 111(1-3):29-37.
31. Stoop J.A. Accident investigations: trends, paradoxes and opportunities. International Journal of Emergency Management 2002, 1(2):170-182.
32. Stoop J.A. Independent accident investigation: a modern safety tool. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2004, 111(1-3):39-44.
33. Svensson O., Lekberg A., Johansson A.E.L. On perspective, expertise and differences in accident analyses: arguments for a multidisciplinary integrated approach. Ergonomics 1999, 42(11):1561-1571.
34. Weber R.P. Basic Content Analysis 1990, Sage, London.
35. Woods D.D., Cook R.I. Perspectives on human error: hindsight biases and local rationality. Handbook of Applied Cognition 1999, 141-171. John Wiley & Sons Limited, New York. F.T. Durso, R.S. Nickerson, R.W. Schvanevelt, S.T. Dumais, D.S. Lindsay, M.T.H. Chi (Eds.).