Notice bibliographique
Résumé
What is the influence of coworkers upon the individual's internalization of safety?Despite it being recognized as one of the most pervasive determinants of individual behaviour, social influence upon individual safety motivation has largely been overlooked by safety studies.This study operationalized group level safety climate to focus on coworker influence -an alternative to the predominant group level leadership perspective.This exploratory, qualitative study interviewed 55 workers across three safety critical industries: firefighting, whitewater raft guiding, and paramedicine.The interviews were combined with workplace visits and six group interviews, using a theoretical proposition guided research model.The semi-structured qualitative approach allowed for the nature of the unstudied relationship between coworker influence and individual safety values to emerge.The focus of the study was at the individual level.This study found that there is significant complexity at the coworker level regarding safety; more so than the predominant hierarchical safety climate paradigm.The major theoretical contribution of this research is a finding that coworker influence and social identity were an active influence upon internalizing safety motivation.Shared experience, social bonding and trust allowed for the individual to socially identify with their group and internalize group safety priorities and incorporate these into self-concept.Coworker social support and trust validated the individuals' sense of competency.This sense of competency was the first defense in dealing with work ambiguity, but more existentially, coworker endorsement of competency also anchored basic work identity.Safety at its most concrete level was about not getting hurt.Safety at its more meaningful level was about the potential harm from finding one's self on the outside of the work group and the internal or psychological implications of such exposure.This research adds complexity to the field of safety studies by including peer interaction and internal safety values.This research also introduces to safety studies as-yet underutilized social theories as a means of examining coworker influence and internalizing safety.In particular, self-determination theory and social identification theory are applied to group and individual level safety behaviour.task of producing safety.Examining three separate sectors allowed for variation in perspective and triangulation of findings. RESEARCH PROBLEMResearch in the safety field regarding coworker influence on individual safety is only just emerging.Intuitively, there seems to be face validity to the idea that if all of one's peers disregard organizational safety directives, then the individual would understand the 'local' group norm to override the organizational mandate.Likewise, if a group is highly safety oriented, it seems reasonable that an individual group member would understand the performance standard as such.With an emerging awareness of social influence upon safety, a number of authors hypothesize that peers (coworkers) may have a greater influence upon individual safety than does the organization or supervisor.Work by Chiaburu and Harrison (2008) on coworkers in general and by Brondino, Silva and Pasini (2012) and Fugas, Melia and Silva (2011) on safety in particular has concluded as much.However, beyond a discussion of norms, a mechanism for this influence is yet to be proposed.This research was exploratory in nature, and looked for mechanisms of influence in an asyet unstudied relationship between coworkers' safety orientation and how the individual internalizes safety beliefs.This research utilized the internalization of safety beliefs at the individual level to examine the social constructs of norms and social influence at the individual level of analysis.Based upon a review of the literature several propositions guided this research.These
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».