Beliefs of University Employees Leaving During a Fire Alarm: A Theory-based Belief Elicitation

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH Safety and Health at Work Pub Date : 2023-06-01 DOI:10.1016/j.shaw.2023.03.002
Christopher Owens , Aurora B. Le , Todd D. Smith , Susan E. Middlestadt
{"title":"Beliefs of University Employees Leaving During a Fire Alarm: A Theory-based Belief Elicitation","authors":"Christopher Owens ,&nbsp;Aurora B. Le ,&nbsp;Todd D. Smith ,&nbsp;Susan E. Middlestadt","doi":"10.1016/j.shaw.2023.03.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Despite workplaces having policies on fire evacuation, many employees still fail to evacuate when there is a fire alarm. The Reasoned Action Approach is designed to reveal the beliefs underlying people's behavioral decisions and thus suggests causal determinants to be addressed with interventions designed to facilitate behavior. This study is a uses a Reasoned Action Approach salient belief elicitation to identify university employees' perceived advantages/disadvantages, approvers/disapprovers, and facilitators/barriers toward them leaving the office building immediately the next time they hear a fire alarm at work.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Employees at a large public United States Midwestern university completed an online cross-sectional survey. A descriptive analysis of the demographic and background variables was completed, and a six-step inductive content analysis of the open-ended responses was conducted to identify beliefs about leaving during a fire alarm.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Regarding consequence, participants perceived that immediately leaving during a fire alarm at work had more disadvantages than advantages, such as low risk perception. Regarding referents, supervisors and coworkers were significant approvers with intention to leave immediately. None of the perceived advantages were significant with intention. Participants listed access and risk perception as significant circumstances with the intention to evacuate immediately.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Norms and risk perceptions are key determinants that may influence employees to evacuate immediately during a fire alarm at work. Normative-based and attitude-based interventions may prove effective in increasing the fire safety practices of employees.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56149,"journal":{"name":"Safety and Health at Work","volume":"14 2","pages":"Pages 201-206"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/96/05/main.PMC10300468.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Safety and Health at Work","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2093791123000185","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Despite workplaces having policies on fire evacuation, many employees still fail to evacuate when there is a fire alarm. The Reasoned Action Approach is designed to reveal the beliefs underlying people's behavioral decisions and thus suggests causal determinants to be addressed with interventions designed to facilitate behavior. This study is a uses a Reasoned Action Approach salient belief elicitation to identify university employees' perceived advantages/disadvantages, approvers/disapprovers, and facilitators/barriers toward them leaving the office building immediately the next time they hear a fire alarm at work.

Methods

Employees at a large public United States Midwestern university completed an online cross-sectional survey. A descriptive analysis of the demographic and background variables was completed, and a six-step inductive content analysis of the open-ended responses was conducted to identify beliefs about leaving during a fire alarm.

Results

Regarding consequence, participants perceived that immediately leaving during a fire alarm at work had more disadvantages than advantages, such as low risk perception. Regarding referents, supervisors and coworkers were significant approvers with intention to leave immediately. None of the perceived advantages were significant with intention. Participants listed access and risk perception as significant circumstances with the intention to evacuate immediately.

Conclusion

Norms and risk perceptions are key determinants that may influence employees to evacuate immediately during a fire alarm at work. Normative-based and attitude-based interventions may prove effective in increasing the fire safety practices of employees.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
火警期间大学员工离职的信念:基于理论的信念启发
尽管工作场所有火灾疏散政策,但当发生火灾警报时,许多员工仍然没有撤离。“理性行动方法”旨在揭示人们行为决策背后的信念,从而建议通过旨在促进行为的干预措施来解决因果决定因素。本研究采用理性行动法(reasoning Action Approach)的显著信念启发法(salient belief elicitation)来识别大学员工在下次听到火警警报时立即离开办公楼的感知优势/劣势、赞成者/反对者,以及促成者/阻碍者。方法美国中西部一所大型公立大学的员工完成了一项在线横断面调查。对人口统计和背景变量进行了描述性分析,并对开放式回答进行了六步归纳内容分析,以确定在火灾警报期间离开的信念。结果:就后果而言,参与者认为在火灾警报期间立即离开工作场所弊大于利,例如风险认知低。在推荐人方面,主管和同事是非常赞成立即离职的人。在有意的情况下,所有感知到的优势都不显著。参与者将通道和风险感知列为具有立即撤离意图的重要情况。结论规范和风险认知是影响员工在火灾报警时立即撤离的关键决定因素。以规范和态度为基础的干预措施可能在增加员工的消防安全实践方面证明是有效的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Safety and Health at Work
Safety and Health at Work Social Sciences-Safety Research
CiteScore
6.40
自引率
5.70%
发文量
1080
审稿时长
38 days
期刊介绍: Safety and Health at Work (SH@W) is an international, peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary journal published quarterly in English beginning in 2010. The journal is aimed at providing grounds for the exchange of ideas and data developed through research experience in the broad field of occupational health and safety. Articles may deal with scientific research to improve workers'' health and safety by eliminating occupational accidents and diseases, pursuing a better working life, and creating a safe and comfortable working environment. The journal focuses primarily on original articles across the whole scope of occupational health and safety, but also welcomes up-to-date review papers and short communications and commentaries on urgent issues and case studies on unique epidemiological survey, methods of accident investigation, and analysis. High priority will be given to articles on occupational epidemiology, medicine, hygiene, toxicology, nursing and health services, work safety, ergonomics, work organization, engineering of safety (mechanical, electrical, chemical, and construction), safety management and policy, and studies related to economic evaluation and its social policy and organizational aspects. Its abbreviated title is Saf Health Work.
期刊最新文献
How Resilient are Lucid Motivators? Endeavoring Reforms for Effects of Psycho-social Factors on Workers Health Through Concurrent Engineering Assessment of Occupational Exposure to Inhalable Aerosols in an Instant Powdered Food Manufacturing Plant in Norway Management Architecture With Multi-modal Ensemble AI Models for Worker Safety Safety Climate Transformation in Oil and Gas Company Ownership Transition (Study Case from Multinational to National Company) Respiratory and Other Hazard Characteristics of Substances in Cleaning Products Used in Healthcare Centres in England and Wales
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1