The path of accident analysis: the traditional paradigm and extending the origins of the expansion of analysis
The path of accident analysis: the traditional paradigm and extending the origins of the expansion of analysis
复制标题
DOI：
10.1590/s1414-32832006000100013
复制
发表时间：
2006-06-01
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Almeida, Ildeberto Muniz de
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Almeida, Ildeberto Muniz de
传统的事故处理方法假设，遵守程序和规范可以保护系统免受事故的影响，而这些事件是由工人的错误行为造成的，部分原因是人格方面。这些行为的识别可以基于将它们与安全专家提前意识到的标准“安全工作实践”进行比较。近几十年来，新的替代观点扩大了事故分析的范围，并开辟了质疑传统方法对人和工作概念的假设的道路。这些新方法有助于突出传统做法的无效结果：指责和惩罚受害者，建议培训，并提出规范，而不改变事故发生的系统。新的方法表明，传统的方法是完全磨损，并强调操作员对系统安全的贡献的重要性。
The traditional approach to accidents assumes that compliance with procedures and norms protects the system from accidents and that these events are caused by the faulty behavior of workers, which results partly from personality aspects. Identification of these behaviors can be based on comparing them with the standard "safe working practices", which safety experts are aware of ahead of time. In recent decades, new alternative views have expanded the perimeters of accident analyses and opened the way to questioning the assumption of the traditional approach to the concepts of the human being and work. These new approaches help to highlight the sterile results of traditional practices: blaming and punishing victims, recommending training, and proposing norms without changing the systems in which the accidents took place. The new approaches suggest that the traditional approach is totally worn out and emphasize the importance of operator contribution for system safety.