Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of boxes
- List of figures
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- 1 A psychological framework for analysing risk
- 2 Hazard perception
- 3 Individual and group differences in risk perception
- 4 Decision-making about risks
- 5 Risk and emotion
- 6 Risk communication
- 7 Errors, accidents and emergencies
- 8 Risk and complex organisations
- 9 Social amplification and social representations of risk
- 10 Changing risk responses
- References
- Index
7 - Errors, accidents and emergencies
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 16 December 2010
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of boxes
- List of figures
- Preface
- Acknowledgements
- 1 A psychological framework for analysing risk
- 2 Hazard perception
- 3 Individual and group differences in risk perception
- 4 Decision-making about risks
- 5 Risk and emotion
- 6 Risk communication
- 7 Errors, accidents and emergencies
- 8 Risk and complex organisations
- 9 Social amplification and social representations of risk
- 10 Changing risk responses
- References
- Index
Summary
Chapter preview
This chapter examines how human errors can produce hazards. It summarises the variety of types of error that come into play. One typology of errors focuses upon their aetiology and this is considered. The more general factors that result in human error are also outlined. It is emphasised that individual error must be seen in the broader context – determined by organisational structures and intergroup relations. The Chernobyl nuclear reactor accident is used as an illustration of the many error factors that can be at work in producing a major accident. It points to the significance of violations rather than error in the genesis of accidents, and this is explored. The chapter goes on to explain how errors not only create hazards; they can also be the product of hazards. Examples of hazard perception, risk-taking and error incidence are provided from everyday activities, like driving an automobile. The theory of ‘risk homeostasis’ is outlined and it is suggested that there is little empirical support for it. Similarly, the notions of error proneness and motivated errors are discussed but their limitations as explanatory tools are highlighted. The significance of major accidents, like Chernobyl, for the subsequent perception of hazards and risk decisions is analysed. It is concluded that, while major accidents can have an impact on risk estimates and tolerance, their effect is time-limited. The definition of an emergency is examined. The possibility of emergency profiling, akin to hazard characterisation, is suggested.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Psychology of Risk , pp. 173 - 195Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007