4.7 Article

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

期刊

SAFETY SCIENCE
卷 50, 期 4, 页码 1158-1170

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2011.11.009

关键词

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

资金

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

向作者/读者索取更多资源

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.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据