权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

Collaborative Research: Research: RUI: Engineers making process safety judgements...Mind the Gap! Beliefs vs. behavior

合作研究：研究：RUI：工程师做出过程安全判断...注意差距！

基本信息

批准号：
2113844
负责人：
Cheryl Bodnar
金额：
$ 20.54万
依托单位：
Rowan University
依托单位国家：
美国
项目类别：
Standard Grant
财政年份：
2021
资助国家：
美国
起止时间：
2021-09-01 至 2025-08-31
项目状态：
未结题

来源：
https://www.nsf.gov/awardsearch/showAward?AWD_ID=2113844&HistoricalAwards=false
关键词：
Collaborative Research RUI Engineers making

项目摘要

Chemical plant explosions and fires often make headlines due to the far-reaching implications for the health and safety of workers, the environment, and the local community. Investigations into these incidents have found that they are typically the result of a series of judgements that are made by company personnel (including engineers) over a significant period of time. Researchers have established that how individuals believe they will make decisions is often not the same as how they actually behave, and we posit that an inability to reflect on any gap between beliefs and behaviors is a barrier to sound judgements. Therefore, it is critical that engineers gain awareness of any gap that may exist between their beliefs and behavior to enable reflective and safe judgements. In this research project, we will investigate and compare the beliefs and behaviors of both senior chemical engineering students and engineers working in process safety contexts. As judgements related to process safety would be difficult to model in the classroom and potentially dangerous within an actual facility, we will use a game-based simulation that allows individuals to role-play as a senior plant engineer. The digital environment allows individuals to experience first-hand the safety challenges that arise in an industrial environment while being safe and preventing the disastrous outcomes that could occur in a real life setting when making these judgements. Participants will then learn about the relationship between how they believed they would behave and how they behaved, which is intended to enable awareness of the complexity of process safety judgements.The research study will leverage both quantitative and qualitative methods through interviews, written reflections, and immersive game-play to answer the following four research questions: 1) What do participants believe about how they approach making judgements? 2) How do they behave when actually making judgements? 3) What gap, if any, exists between their beliefs and behavior, and 4) How do participants reconcile any gap? Our research design captures beliefs at multiple data points over time enabling us to generate an understanding of the efficacy of both 1) the game play, and 2) exposure to an individualized profile demonstrating the relationship between beliefs and behaviors. Our method for characterizing the gap between beliefs and behaviors and presenting that information to engineers to enable awareness and reflection has two potential impacts. First, it has the potential 1) to be transferable across diverse contexts with implications for improving professional judgement widely, and 2) to make specific recommendations for the efficacy of the aforementioned two distinct interventions based on participants who include engineering students and engineers working in process safety contexts. The knowledge produced by this project can benefit not only scholars seeking to further study the relationship between beliefs and behaviors, but also engineering educators responsible for the professional formation of their students’ ability to exercise reflective judgement, especially in process safety contexts. Finally, the outcomes of this work have the potential to contribute to the professional formation of practicing engineers by informing workforce development. This reflective process, which brings awareness to gaps between beliefs and behaviors, is an unconventional yet promising approach to ultimately reducing process safety incidents.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.

化工厂爆炸和火灾经常成为头条新闻，因为它对工人的健康和安全、环境和当地社区产生了深远的影响。对这些事件的调查发现，它们通常是公司人员(包括工程师)在很长一段时间内做出一系列判断的结果。研究人员已经证实，个人相信自己会做出决定的方式往往与他们实际的行为方式不同，我们假设，无法反思信仰和行为之间的任何差距是做出合理判断的障碍。因此，工程师意识到他们的信念和行为之间可能存在的任何差距，以便能够进行反思和安全判断，这一点至关重要。在这项研究项目中，我们将调查和比较化学工程专业的大四学生和从事过程安全工作的工程师的信念和行为。由于与工艺安全相关的判断很难在课堂上建模，而且在实际设施中具有潜在的危险，我们将使用基于游戏的模拟，允许个人扮演高级工厂工程师的角色。数字环境允许个人在做出这些判断时，亲身体验工业环境中出现的安全挑战，同时确保安全，并防止在现实生活环境中可能发生的灾难性后果。这项研究将通过访谈、书面反思和身临其境的游戏游戏，利用定量和定性的方法，回答以下四个研究问题：1)参与者认为他们如何做出判断？2)他们在实际做出判断时如何表现？3)他们的信念和行为之间存在什么差距，以及4)参与者如何协调任何差距？我们的研究设计捕获了随时间推移的多个数据点的信念，使我们能够理解1)玩游戏和2)暴露在展示信念和行为之间关系的个性化配置文件中的功效。我们描述信念和行为之间的差距，并将这些信息呈现给工程师以实现意识和反思的方法有两个潜在的影响。首先，它有可能1)可以在不同的背景下转移，对广泛提高专业判断力产生影响，2)根据参与者(包括在过程安全背景下工作的工程专业学生和工程师)，对上述两种不同干预措施的有效性提出具体建议。这个项目所产生的知识不仅可以使寻求进一步研究信仰和行为之间关系的学者受益，也可以使工程教育者受益，他们负责专业地形成他们的学生进行反思性判断的能力，特别是在过程安全的背景下。最后，这项工作的成果有可能通过告知劳动力发展来促进执业工程师的专业形成。这一反思性过程使人们意识到信念和行为之间的差距，是一种非传统但有希望最终减少过程安全事件的方法。该奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力优势和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。