Exploring the relationship between safety culture and safety performance in U.S. nuclear power operations

Safety Science

Volumn 69, Issue , 2014, Pages 37-47

  Morrow, Stephanie L ^a   Kenneth Koves, G ^b   Barnes, Valerie E ^a  

^a U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION   (United States)

^b Institute of Nuclear Power Operations   (United States)

Author keywords

Human and organizational factors; Nuclear power; Organizational culture; Safety climate; Safety culture; Safety performance

Indexed keywords

BENCHMARKING; FACTOR ANALYSIS; NUCLEAR ENERGY; NUCLEAR INDUSTRY; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS; SURVEYS;

HUMAN AND ORGANIZATIONAL FACTORS; ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURES; SAFETY CLIMATE; SAFETY CULTURE; SAFETY PERFORMANCE;

SAFETY FACTOR;

ARTICLE; CULTURAL SAFETY; EXPLORATORY RESEARCH; FACTORIAL ANALYSIS; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; NUCLEAR INDUSTRY; NUCLEAR POWER PLANT; NUCLEAR SAFETY; OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; STATISTICAL SIGNIFICANCE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84903881065     PISSN: 09257535     EISSN: 18791042     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2014.02.022     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Ajzen I., Fishbein M. Attitude-behavior relations: a theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychol. Bull. 1977, 84:888-918.
2. Beus J., Payne S., Berman M., Arthur W. Safety climate and injuries: an examination of theoretical and empirical relationships. J. Appl. Psychol. 2010, 95(4):713-727.
3. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, 2007. Investigation Report, Refinery explosion and fire, BP, Texas City, TX, March 23, 2005. [2005-04-I-TX]. Washington, DC.
4. Christian M.S., Bradley J.C., Wallace J.C., Burke M.J. Workplace safety: a meta-analysis of the roles of person and situation factors. J. Appl. Psychol. 2009, 94(5):1103-1127.
5. Clarke S. The relationship between safety climate and safety performance: a meta-analytic review. J. Occup. Health Psychol. 2006, 11(4):315-327.
6. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences 1988, Lawrence Earlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ. second ed.
7. Ford J., MacCallum R., Tait M. The application of exploratory factor analysis in applied psychology: a critical review and analysis. Pers. Psychol. 1986, 39:291-314.
8. Guldenmund F. The nature of safety culture: a review of theory and research. Safety Sci. 2000, 34(1-3):215-257.
9. Hinkin T. A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires. Organ. Res. Methods 1998, 1(1):104-121.
10. Institute for Nuclear Power Operations Principles for a Strong Nuclear Safety Culture 2004, Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, Atlanta.
11. International Atomic Energy Agency, 2006. Application of the management system for facilities and activities: safety guide. IAEA Safety Standards Series No. GS-G-3.1. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna.
12. International Nuclear Safety Advisory Group, 1986. Summary Report on the Post-Accident Review Meeting on the Chernobyl Accident, Safety Series No. 75-INSAG-1, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna.
13. James L.R. Aggregation bias in estimates of perceptual agreement. J. Appl. Psychol. 1982, 67:219-229.
14. Kim J., Mueller C. Introduction to Factor Analysis: What it is and how to do it 1978, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA.
15. Krosnick J. Survey research. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 1999, 50:537-567.
16. Lee T., Harrison K. Assessing safety culture in nuclear power stations. Safety Sci. 2000, 34:61-97.
17. McGraw K., Wong S.P. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol. Methods 1996, 1(1):30-46.
18. Mearns K., Whitaker S., Flin R. Safety climate, safety management practice, and safety performance in offshore environments. Safety Sci. 2003, 41:641-680.
19. Mine Safety and Health Administration, 2011. Report of Investigation: Fatal Underground Mine Explosion, April 5, 2010. Coal Mine Safety and Health.
20. National Diet of Japan, 2012. Report of the Fukushima Independent Investigation Commission, March 11, 2011. Tokyo, Japan.
21. National Transportation Safety Board, 2010. Collision of Two Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority Metrorail Trains Near Fort Totten Station, Washington, D.C., June 22, 2009. Railroad Accident Report NTSB/RAR-10/02. Washington, DC.
22. Neal A., Griffin M. A study of the lagged relationships among safety climate, safety motivation, safety behavior, and accidents at the individual and group levels. J. Appl. Psychol. 2006, 91(4):946-953.
23. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2006. Technical Basis for Inspection Program. NRC Inspection Manual, Chapter 0308, Appendix 2. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
24. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2008. Industry Trends Program. NRC Inspection Manual, Chapter 0313. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
25. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2011a. Components within the Cross-Cutting Areas. NRC Inspection Manual, Chapter 0310. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
26. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2011b. Operating Reactor Assessment Program. NRC Inspection Manual, Chapter 0305. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.
27. Reason J. Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents 1997, Ashgate.
28. Reiman T., Oedewald P. Assessment of complex sociotechnical systems - theoretical issues concerning the use of organizational culture and organizational core task concepts. Safety Sci. 2007, 45:745-768.
29. Rogovin, M., 1980. Three Mile Island - A Report to the Commissioners and the Public, vol. 1.
30. Schein E.H. Organizational Culture and Leadership 1992, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. Second ed.
31. Schein E.H. Organizational Culture and Leadership 2010, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco. fourth ed.
32. Sorensen J.N. Safety culture: a survey of the state-of-the-art. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safety 2002, 76:189-204.
33. United States Coast Guard, 2011. Report of Investigation into the Circumstances Surrounding the Explosion, Fire, Sinking and Loss of Eleven Crew Members Aboard the Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit Deepwater Horizon in the Gulf of Mexico, April 20-22, 2010. Vol. 1, Washington, DC.
34. Zohar D. A group-level model of safety climate: testing the effect of group climate on microaccidents in manufacturing jobs. J. Appl. Psychol. 2000, 85(4):587-596.