4.7 Article

Systems-based accident analysis methods: A comparison of Accimap, HFACS, and STAMP

Journal

SAFETY SCIENCE
Volume 50, Issue 4, Pages 1158-1170

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.11.009

Keywords

Accidents; Accident analysis; Led outdoor activities; Accimap; HFACS; STAMP

Funding

  1. Australian Research Council
  2. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Three accident causation models, each with their own associated approach to accident analysis, currently dominate the human factors literature. Although the models are in general agreement that accidents represent a complex, systems phenomenon, the subsequent analysis methods prescribed are very different. This paper presents a case study-based comparison of the three methods: Accimap. HFACS and STAMP. Each was used independently by separate analysts to analyse the recent Mangatepopo gorge tragedy in which six students and their teacher drowned while participating in a led gorge walking activity. The outputs were then compared and contrasted, revealing significant differences across the three methods. These differences are discussed in detail, and the implications for accident analysis are articulated. In conclusion, a modified version of the Accimap method, incorporating domain specific taxonomies of failure modes, is recommended for future accident analysis efforts. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available