Workplace safety climate assessment based on behaviors and measurable indicators
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Previous conceptualizations of safety climate present snapshots of the state of workplace safety. In reality, the factors of workplace safety climate are complex and need to be analyzed using a systemic approach. In this article, we expand on the customary concept of safety climate, and propose a systemic research framework that integrates four study fields: engineering, ergonomics, operation management, and technology management. In this framework, we define micro and macro safety climate concepts based on the study object and organizational hierarchy. Our model focuses on two safety climate dimensions: behaviors and measurable indicators. First, we propose that the safety process consists of four basic behaviors: perceive, decide, communicate, and act (PDCA). These PDCA behaviors constitute a safety climate sociotechnical system involving the three roles of operator, supervisor, and manager. We then present 12 measurable indicators of PDCA behaviors for each safety climate research field to advance the systematic assessment of both qualitative and quantitative facets of safety climate. © 2008 American Institute of Chemical Engineers Process Saf Prog, 2008
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it