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
- Australian Research Council
- Australian National Health and Medical Research Council
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。
推荐
暂无数据