4.6 Article

Evaluation of an Assertiveness Training based on the Social Learning Theory for Occupational Health, Safety and Environment Practitioners

期刊

SUSTAINABILITY
卷 13, 期 20, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/su132011504

关键词

assertiveness training; social anxiety; occupational health and safety; sustainability; social skills

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Assertiveness is essential for positive work relationships and team functioning. Training in assertiveness can improve work performance, prevent harassment, promote safe behaviors, and facilitate critical decision-making. Studies have shown that assertive training for OHSE technicians is effective in increasing assertiveness and reducing social anxiety.
Assertiveness is a fundamental type of behavior for the creation and maintenance of positive relationships at work and the facilitation of team functioning. Therefore, the promotion of assertiveness contributes to improving work performance, preventing harassment at work, facilitating the adoption of safe behaviors and making critical decisions in terms of occupational health and safety. However, few studies have evaluated the effectiveness of assertive training to train occupational health, safety and environment (OHSE) technicians to facilitate their work as agents of change in the attitudes and behaviors of other workers. Therefore, an assertive training was carried out to increase assertiveness and decrease social anxiety in this type of professional. The training effectiveness was evaluated following a pretest-posttest group design. The results from both a pilot study in a sample of 328 undergraduate students and a study in a sample of 155 OHSE technicians indicated that the training was effective in achieving both objectives. Moreover, Cohen's d statistics suggest that the effect size was intermediate. These results are discussed with respect to their role in contributing to occupational health safety and environment practices as well as to the organizations' sustainability.

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

4.6
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