relationship between organisational safety culture dimensions and crashes

8

Click here to load reader

Upload: ebrahim

Post on 16-Apr-2017

215 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Relationship between organisational safety culture dimensions and crashes

This article was downloaded by: [University of Otago]On: 22 December 2014, At: 02:39Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Click for updates

International Journal of Injury Control and SafetyPromotionPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nics20

Relationship between organisational safety culturedimensions and crashesSakineh Varmazyara, Seyed Bagher Mortazavib, Shirazeh Arghamic & Ebrahim Hajizadehd

a Department of Occupational Health Engineering, Faculty of Medical Sciences, TarbiatModares University and Qazvin University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iranb Department of Occupational Health Engineering, Faculty of Medical Sciences, TarbiatModares University, Tehran, Iranc Department of Occupational Health Engineering, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences,Zanjan, Irand Department of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University,Tehran, IranPublished online: 10 Dec 2014.

To cite this article: Sakineh Varmazyar, Seyed Bagher Mortazavi, Shirazeh Arghami & Ebrahim Hajizadeh (2014): Relationshipbetween organisational safety culture dimensions and crashes, International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion,DOI: 10.1080/17457300.2014.947296

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17457300.2014.947296

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Page 2: Relationship between organisational safety culture dimensions and crashes

Relationship between organisational safety culture dimensions and crashes

Sakineh Varmazyara, Seyed Bagher Mortazavib*, Shirazeh Arghamic and Ebrahim Hajizadehd

aDepartment of Occupational Health Engineering, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University and Qazvin University ofMedical Sciences, Tehran, Iran; bDepartment of Occupational Health Engineering, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat ModaresUniversity, Tehran, Iran; cDepartment of Occupational Health Engineering, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran;

dDepartment of Biostatistics, Faculty of Medical Sciences, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran

(Received 1 March 2014; accepted 18 July 2014)

Knowing about organisational safety culture in public transportation system can provide an appropriate guide to establisheffective safety measures and interventions to improve safety at work. The aim of this study was investigation ofassociation between safety culture dimensions (leadership styles and company values, usage of crashes information andprevention programmes, management commitment and safety policy, participation and control) with involved self-reported crashes. The associations were considered through Spearman correlation, Pearson chi-square test and logisticregression. The results showed an association among self-reported crashes (occurrence or non-occurrence) and factorsincluding leadership styles and company values; management commitment and safety policy; and control. Moreover, itwas found a negative correlation and an odds ratio less than one between control and self-reported crashes.

Keywords: safety culture; public transportation; crash

1. Introduction

Safety culture is a subset of organisational culture (Cooper,

2000) which is the values shared among organisation mem-

bers about what the organisation has (i.e. policies and regu-

lation), what people do (i.e. safety-related behaviours) and

how people feel (Cooper, 2000; Wiegmann, von Thaden,

& Gibbons, 2007). Safety culture affects attitudes and

safety-related behaviour of the members of an organisation

(Cooper, 2000; Wu, Lin, & Shiau, 2010), employees’

health and safety (Fernandez-Muniz, Montes-Peon, &

Vazquez-Ordas, 2007) and safety consequences such as

injuries, fatalities and other incidents (Wu, Lin, & Shiau,

2009).

Commitments to safety in organisations by upper

management provide resources to develop and implement

safety measures. Therefore, beliefs, attitudes and practices

emphasise on minimum exposure of employees to

hazards. Moreover, the attitudes of company to safety and

precautions have negative effects on accident rates (Dorn,

2008).

1.1. Studies on the relationship between safe practices

and crash involvement

Pertaining to driving practices and accident, the findings

indicated that unsafe driving behaviours and higher crash

involvement rates were among work-related drivers in

comparison with drivers who use their own vehicles. The

higher rates of work-related crashes have been reported

due to fewer check practices being performed, such as

water in the radiator and pressure on the tyres. Also, some

evidences showed that the transportation fleet safety poli-

cies and practices and safety climate perceptions in place

within each organisation had a positive impact on the

drivers’ behaviour (Newnam, Watson, & Murray, 2002;

Wills, Watson, & Biggs, 2004). Some studies showed a

significant negative correlation between traffic safety,

work safety, violations and errors with the number of acci-

dents among professional drivers (Dorn, 2008; €Ozkan &

Lajunen, 2005). Other studies have shown that strong

safety culture resulted in higher safety climate perception

among the members, which can predict their perceived

safe behaviours (Mart�ınez-C�orcoles, Gracia, Tom�as, &

Peir�o, 2011). Finally, unrealistic time schedules of compa-

nies contributes to crash involvement, and in fact time

limitation increases crash risk (Dorn, 2012).

As the safety culture indicators are related to acci-

dent rates (Itoh, Andersen, & Seki, 2004), it is a piv-

otal factor to achieve organisational safety (Naevestad,

2010). On the other hand, little research has been con-

ducted about the relationship between safety culture in

public transportation and crashes, the main object of

this research was to investigate the relationship

between organisational safety culture dimensions and

self-reported crash involvement (the occurrence and

non-occurrence).

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

� 2014 Taylor & Francis

International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion, 2014

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17457300.2014.947296

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f O

tago

] at

02:

39 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Page 3: Relationship between organisational safety culture dimensions and crashes

Table 1. A summary of the exploratory factor analysis results.

Factors Items Factor loading Variance explained Eigenvalues >1

Leadership stylesand companyvalues (10 items)

(1) In this company, thereare safety instructions forworking with vehicles.

0.48

(2) My supervisor encouragesdrivers to offer their suggestionsto improve transport safety.

0.55

(3) My supervisor will provideexplanations about the safetransport objectives and programmes.

0.67

(4) My supervisor will identifymy work errors and teachme to correct them.

0.49

(5) The company gives importanceto the sincerity and participationof all drivers in collecting informationabout driving crashes.

0.69 34.6 14.5

(6) The company gives importanceto drivers’ initiative in findingnew solutions to safe transport.

0.48

(7) The company gives importanceto drivers’ collaboration andparticipation to promote safety.

0.41

(8) Drivers are informed aboutsafety rules and instructions.

0.66

(9) The objectives, benefits andproblems related to safe and unsafetransport are described to drivers.

0.48

(10) Meetings are held to informthe drivers about the potentialhazards of driving crashes and onhow to prevent them.

0.65

Usage of crashes informationand Prevention programmes(7 items)

(11) Training courses are held fordrivers about work-related health issues.

0.44

(12) In this company, specialisedtraining courses are held about theuse of tools and safety equipment.

0.70

(13) Crash prevention programmesare set in accordance with theanticipated hazards.

0.67

(14) Crash prevention programmesare shared with drivers.

0.65

(15) The results of driving crashinvestigations are used to solvetransport problems.

0.50 5.35 2.24

(16) The results of driving crashinvestigations are used to informthe drivers about the consequencesof breaking rules.

0.48

(17) The results of driving crashinvestigations are used to determinetraining demands and programmes.

0.44

Management commitmentand safety policy (6 items)

(18) The company managers providefinancial and human resourcerequirements for the implementationof safety principles.

0.66

(continued)

2 S. Varmazyar et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f O

tago

] at

02:

39 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Page 4: Relationship between organisational safety culture dimensions and crashes

2. Methods

2.1. Design of the questionnaire, participants

and procedure

The results of the previous studies can be used to develop a

new questionnaire (Guldenmund, 2007). Thus, safety cul-

ture questionnaire (SCQ) derived from the published papers

available in the literature (D�ıaz-Cabrera, Hern�andez-Fernaud, & Isla-D�ıaz, 2007; Fernandez-Muniz et al., 2007;

Wiegmann et al., 2007) thesis (Chenhall, 2010) and some

occupational health professors, PhD students and Health,

Safety and Environment (HSE) experts offered questions.

In this study, 628 bus drivers were randomly selected

by line supervisors of the bus company based on person-

nel code. An identification code was added to the

questionnaire (demographic and safety culture) for match-

ing the responses to assess repeatability. The researchers

explained the purpose of the study in a session with driv-

ers and ask them to complete the questionnaires. The

majority of drivers (n D 556, 88.5%) agreed to participate

the in study; the response rate was compatible.

Some studies (Hours et al., 2008; Taylor & Dorn,

2006; Varmazyar, Mortazavi, Arghami, & Hajizadeh,

2013) have shown that diseases and family problems can

result in crashes. 388 subjects (69.8%) were excluded

from the study due to fatigue, taking medication, some

disease and family problems. Thus, 168 (30.2%) question-

naires were examined to determine the role of safety cul-

ture in crashes.

Table 1. (Continued )

Factors Items Factor loading Variance explained Eigenvalues >1

(19) In this company, drivers’ safetyis important in the workplace.

0.68

(20) In this company, the managersbelieve it is their duty to payattention to the vehicle safety.

0.60 4.56 1.91

(21) In this company, managers discusssafety issues of the current programmeswith drivers in the meetings.

0.62

(22) The company has its own specialoperational policies and procedurein the context of health and safetytransport.

0.48

(23) The company tries to makethe drivers satisfied about the safetyof transport (vehicle and route).

0.41

Participation (3 items) (24) The drivers’ experiences who havebeen involved in crashes are usedto identify better solutions forsafe transport.

0.53

(25) Drivers’ opinions and suggestionsare used in creating instructionsfor safe transport.

0.57 3.93 1.65

(26) When the safety decision is madein company, meetings are heldbetween officials and drivers toincrease motivation in drivers.

0.54

Control (3 items) (27) In this company, drivingcrashes are reported, recorded,and analysed.

0.71

(28) The previous successfulprogrammes and solutions areexamined to solve transport problems.

0.41 3.22 1.35

(29) To ensure the effectiveperformance of the company,technical and safety inspectionsare regularly performed on all thevehicles and routes.

0.46

Note: Extraction method: principal axis factoring; rotation method: varimax with Kaiser normalisation � arotation converged in 18 iterations.

International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f O

tago

] at

02:

39 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Page 5: Relationship between organisational safety culture dimensions and crashes

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. Demographic and crash information

Drivers were asked to fill out a questionnaire which con-

tained items about age, education, marital status and the

number of all crashes at work over the last three years.

Drivers’ age ranged from 30 to 50 years with mean 39.3

§ 5.1 years. All participants were male and 99.4% were

married. 63.7% of drivers had high school or higher

degrees. The mean score and standard deviation of

involvement in crashes in the last three years were

2.9 § 3.1.

2.2.2. Validity, reliability and determination of safety

culture dimensions

Face validity (judgment about syntax, organisation and

appropriateness of 64 items of the primary questionnaire)

(DeVon et al., 2007), content validity ratio (CVR)

(surveying necessity of items) and content validity index

(CVI) (score for the entire instrument) (Lawshe, 1975)

have been investigated by 15 experts. CVR scores ranged

from 0 (not necessary) to 2 (necessary). The experts’

panel included occupational health professors and PhD

candidates, HSE (health, safety and environment) and

psychologists. CVR is calculated according to the follow-

ing formula:

CVR ¼ ne ¡ N2

N2

where ne is the number of experts who rated an item as

‘essential’ and N is the total number of experts.

According to the criterion values provided by Lawshe

(1975), acceptable range CVR is equal to or larger than

0.49 for the 15 panelists. In other words, CVR obtained

from the above formula should be equal or larger than the

CVR value of 0.49 for each item (Lawshe, 1975). Based

on the CVR value, 22 items with CVR <0.49 were

dropped.

CVI is simply the mean score of those retained items

with CVR �0.49 according to the following formula

(DeVon et al., 2007; Lawshe, 1975). CVI was obtained as

0.762 that showed an acceptable level.

CVI ¼P

CVR for all retained items

retained items numbers

For test�retest reliability, 35 subjects were asked to fill

out the questionnaire for the second time after almost two

months. Pearson correlation (0.81) was calculated for

judging the correlation between the retest and the initial

study, which is acceptable (the value �0.70 was consid-

ered satisfactory).

The SCQ 42 items were filled out by drivers on a five-

point Likert scale (0 D completely disagree to 4 D

completely agree). Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) by

principal axis factoring (PAF) with varimax rotation

(Dorn, 2008) was used to identify the number and nature

of the factors of SCQ. In factor selection, the eigenvalue

rule �1 (Diaz-Cabreraet al., 2007) and the scree plot test

(Chenhall, 2010; Vandenberg, 2009) were used. The num-

ber of items representing each factor was required to reach

the minimum value of three variables in that factor and a

minimum factor loading of 0.40 per item (Chenhall,

2010). Accordingly, among the ten factors exited from

EFA, five factors (including eight items) that are com-

posed of only one or two items are not interpreted (Diaz-

Cabrera et al., 2007) so, those were excluded from the list

of factors. Consequently, five key dimensions (including

29 items) related to safety culture were obtained: (1) lead-

ership styles and company values; (2) usage of crash

information and preventive programmes; (3) management

commitment and safety policy; (4) participation and (5)

control (see Table 1). The internal consistency of the

questionnaire (items and factors) were calculated using

Cronbach’s alpha coefficients (Cox & Cheyne, 2000),

(see Table 2).

2.2.3. Surveying the relationship between safety culture

dimensions and crashes involvement

The Pearson chi-square, Spearman correlation tests and

logistic regression were used to examine the relationship

between the mean of the items constitutive each of safety

culture dimensions in Likert scale (that are ordinal varia-

bles) and self-reported crashes involvement (134 drivers

experiencing crash versus 34 drivers not being involved in

any crashes/accidents) as nominal variable.

Table 2. Mean scores of items for the SCQ factors and reliabilitystatistics by factor.

Factors Mean SDCronbach’s aeach factor

Cronbach’s atotal items

Leadership stylesand companyvalues (10 items)

11.7 9.4 0.90

Usage of crashesinformation andPreventionprogrammes(7 items)

7.4 6.3 0.86 0.95

Managementcommitmentand safety policy(6 items)

5.9 5.3 0.81

Participation(3 items)

2.5 2.9 0.77

Control (3 items) 11.7 3.0 0.71

4 S. Varmazyar et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f O

tago

] at

02:

39 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Page 6: Relationship between organisational safety culture dimensions and crashes

3. Results

3.1. Self-reported crashes involvement

Frequency and percentage of drivers involved in all self-

reported accidents of last three years in study sample (n D168) are shown in Table 3. Exactly, 29.8% drivers were

involved in four crashes or more in the last three years.

3.2. Association between safety culture dimensions

and crashes involvement

Based on the Pearson chi-square test, some of the safety

policies and practices in organisation such as leadership

styles and company values, management commitment

and safety policy and control have a significant associa-

tion with crashes involvement. There is also a signifi-

cant negative correlation between control, as one of the

safety culture dimensions, and crashes involvement

based on Spearman test. The Wald test showed that the

logistic coefficient (B) of control is not equal to zero.

The Exp(B) is the odds ratio associated with each pre-

dictor that Exp(B) values less than one of control shown

reduction of crashes by this variable (see Table 4).

4. Discussion

The main objective of this study was to investigate the

relationships between organisational safety culture dimen-

sions with self-reported crashes involvement.

Three dimensions of safety culture including leadership

style, company values; management commitment, safety

policy; and control are related to crash involvement. So,

safety policies and practices of the aforementioned dimen-

sions (leadership styles, company value; management com-

mitment, safety policy; control) may have an effect on

driving behaviour and consequently reduce crashes. It is

recommended to encourage drivers to improve safety levels

and their collaboration and participation in recognizing

hazards and crash prevention. Organizations should provide

financial and human resources of safety, consider vehicles

safety, record and analysis crashes and inspect safety of

vehicles and routes. In a similar research conducted by

Newnam et al. (2002), they found that organization safety

policies and practices influence driving behaviours in work

were related vehicles more than personal vehicle. Indeed,

lack of work-related vehicle checking practices lead to

increase in crashes (Newnam et al., 2002). Similarly,

inverse relation was reported between traffic safety and

work safety with violations and errors (Dorn, 2008). Also,

there was a significant positive correlation (r D 0.42)

between fleet safety climate perceptions and the safety of

work-related driver behaviour (Wills et al., 2004) and also

between safety culture (r D 0.13) and safety climate (r D0.37) with safety behaviours in nuclear power plant

(Mart�ınez-C�orcoles et al., 2011). One of the studies con-

ducted by Darby, Murray, and Raeside (2009) revealed

that attitude and behaviour scores had a statistically nega-

tive significant association with collision involvement

(Darby et al., 2009). Moreover, the studies of Dorn (2012)

and Oz et al. (2013) revealed that time limitation (poor

organisational safety culture or climate) contributes to fre-

quencies of violations, errors and crash involvement (Dorn,

2012; €Oz, €Ozkan, & Lajunen, 2013).

Management commitment to safety and organisational

safety culture can indirectly reduce unsafe behaviour by

developing a safety management system. On the other

hand, drivers’ involvement and participation influence on

Table 3. Number of drivers involved in crashes in past threeyears.

Percentage Number of drivers Number of crash involvement

20.2 34 0

17.3 29 1

17.9 30 2

14.8 25 3

29.8 50 �4

Table 4. Relationship between safety culture dimensions and self-reported crashes involvement.

Pearson chi-square Logistic regression

FactorsSpearmancorrelations Value df

Sig(p-value) B Wald Sig Exp(B)

95% CI forExp(B) lower�upper

(1) Leadership styles and company values ¡.056 48.8�� 33 0.037 .031 .009 .92 1.03 0.54¡1.94

(2) Usage of crash information andPrevention programmes

¡.107 20.4 23 0.616 ¡.048 .020 .88 .95 0.49¡1.85

(3) Management commitment andsafety policy

¡.059 36.9�� 21 0.017 .035 .015 .90 1.04 0.59¡1.81

(4) Participation ¡.015 12.4 11 0.327 .227 .676 .41 1.25 0.73¡2.16

(5) Control ¡.182� 23.1�� 12 0.027 ¡.645 6.51 .01� .52 0.32¡0.86

�Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level.��Chi-square is significant at the 0.05 level with respect to p-value.

International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f O

tago

] at

02:

39 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Page 7: Relationship between organisational safety culture dimensions and crashes

employees safe practices directly. Consequently, crash

rate will be decreased (Fernandez-Muniz et al., 2007).

Concerning the organisational aspects such as safety

culture leading to the reduction of violations (Cacciabue,

2007), the results of this study indicated that there is a

significant inverse correlation and odds ratio less than

one between control dimensions of safety culture and

self-reported crashes involvement. It can be concluded

that the information obtained from the analysis of crashes

is effective in the prevention of further crashes. In addi-

tion, measures such as investigation of previously held

programmes about safety and the technical and safety

inspections of the vehicles and routes may reduce driving

crashes.

5. Limitation

In relation to the study sample, there was no representa-

tion of female drivers. Because of social culture and job

difficulty, females do not work on buses in Iran. This

study was only implemented for day shift drivers and only

in the governmental transportation system.

6. Conclusion

A variety of aspects of organizational safety culture

including managers’ behavioural patterns, managers’ atti-

tudes and activities, drivers’ suggestions and solutions

about this issue could decrease the number of crashes.

Also, the identification of hazards and the implementation

of safe measures, recording and the analysis of crashes,

the involvement of the drivers to solve the problems, and

revision of previous programmes play important roles in

reducing the number of crashes. Consequently, attention

to each of the above-mentioned aspects may contribute to

the decline of accidents. So, as a suggestion, future

research can investigate the influence of each of the safety

culture dimensions to reduce the accidents.

Acknowledgements

The authors express their gratitude to the senior managers of BusCompany and the middle managers and HSE experts in TehranTransportation Bus Company. We thank Mr. Maryam KeramatKar, PhD student at the University of Otago, for proof reading ofthe manuscript.

References

Cacciabue, C. (2007). Modelling driver behaviour in automotiveenvironments:Critical issues in driver interactions withintelligent transport systems. London, UK: Springer.

Chenhall, E.C. (2010). Assessing safety culture, values, practices,and outcomes. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University.

Cooper, M.D. (2000). Towards a model of safety culture. SafetyScience, 36(2), 111�136.

Cox, S.J., & Cheyne, A.J.T. (2000). Assessing safety culture inoffshore environments. Safety Science, 34(1�3), 111�129.

Darby, P., Murray, W., & Raeside, R. (2009). Applying onlinefleet driver assessment to help identify, target and reduceoccupational road safety risks. Safety Science, 47(3),436�442. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2008.05.004

DeVon, H.A., Block, M.E., Moyle-Wright, P., Ernst, D.M., Hay-den, S.J., Lazzara, D.J., . . . Kostas-Polston, E. (2007). Apsychometric toolbox for testing validity and reliability.Journal of Nursing scholarship, 39(2), 155�164.

D�ıaz-Cabrera, D., Hern�andez-Fernaud, E., & Isla-D�ıaz, R.(2007). An evaluation of a new instrument to measure organ-isational safety culture values and practices. Accident Analy-sis & Prevention, 39(6), 1202�1211.

Dorn, L. (2008). Driver behaviour and training (Vol. 3). Hamp-shire, UK: Ashgate Publishing Company.

Dorn, L. (2012). Investigating safety culture: A qualitative anal-ysis of bus driver behaviour at work. Paper presented at theProceedings of the International Conference on Ergonomics& Human Factors 2012, Blackpool, 16�19 April 2012.

Fernandez-Muniz, B., Montes-Peon, J.M., & Vazquez-Ordas,C.J. (2007). Safety culture: Analysis of the causal relation-ships between its key dimensions. Journal of safetyresearch, 38(6), 627�641. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2007.09.001

Guldenmund, F.W. (2007). The use of questionnaires in safetyculture research � an evaluation. Safety Science, 45(6),723�743.

Hours, M., Fort, E., Charnay, P., Bernard, M., Martin, J.L., Bois-son, D., . . . Laumon, B. (2008). Diseases, consumption ofmedicines and responsibility for a road crash: A case�con-trol study. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 40(5),1789�1796.

Itoh, K., Andersen, H.B., & Seki, M. (2004). Track maintenancetrain operators’ attitudes to job, organisation and manage-ment, and their correlation with accident/incident rate.Cognition, Technology & Work, 6(2), 63�78.

Lawshe, C.H. (1975). A quantitative approach to content valid-ity. Personnel Psychology, 28(4), 563�575.

Mart�ınez-C�orcoles, M., Gracia, F., Tom�as, I., & Peir�o, J.M.(2011). Leadership and employees’ perceived safety behav-iours in a nuclear power plant: A structural equation model.Safety Science, 49(8), 1118�1129.

Naevestad, T.O. (2010). Evaluating a safety culture campaign:Some lessons from a Norwegian case. Safety Science, 48(5),651�659. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2010.01.015

Newnam, S.A., Watson, B.C., & Murray, W. (2002). A compari-son of the factors influencing the safety of work-related driv-ers in work and personal vehicles. Paper presented at theRoad Safety Research, Education and Policing Conference2002, Adelaide.

€Oz, B., €Ozkan, T., & Lajunen, T. (2013). An investigation ofprofessional drivers: Organizational safety climate, driverbehaviours and performance. Transportation Research PartF: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 16(0), 81�91.

€Ozkan, T., & Lajunen, T. (2005). A new addition to DBQ: Posi-tive driver behaviours scale. Transportation Research PartF: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 8(4�5), 355�368.

Taylor, A.H., & Dorn, L. (2006). Stress, fatigue, health, and riskof road traffic accidents among professional drivers: Thecontribution of physical inactivity. Annual Review ofPublic Health, 27, 371�391.

Vandenberg, R.J. (2009). Statistical and methodological mythsand urban legends: Doctrine, verity and fable in the organi-zational and social sciences. New York, NY: Taylor &Francis.

Varmazyar, S., Mortazavi, S.B., Arghami, S., & Hajizadeh, E.(2013). Effect of the mental and physical disorders status of

6 S. Varmazyar et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f O

tago

] at

02:

39 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014

Page 8: Relationship between organisational safety culture dimensions and crashes

Tehran’s public transportation system bus drivers on theoccurrence of crashes. Journal of Safety Promotion andInjury Prevention, 1(3), 168�175.

Wiegmann, D.A., von Thaden, T.L., & Gibbons, A.M. (2007). Areview of safety culture theory and its potential applicationto traffic safety. Improving Traffic Safety Culture in theUnited States, 113.

Wills, A.R., Watson, B.C., & Biggs, H.C. (2004). The relativeinfluence of fleet safety climate on work-related driversafety. Paper presented at the Australasian Road Safety

Research, Education and Policing Conference, Perth, 14�16November.

Wu, T.C., Lin, C.H., & Shiau, S.Y. (2009). Developing measuresfor assessing the causality of safety culture in a petrochemi-cal industry. Water, Air, & Soil Pollution: Focus, 9(5),507�515.

Wu, T.-C., Lin, C.-H., & Shiau, S.-Y. (2010). Predictingsafety culture: The roles of employer, operations manager andsafety professional. Journal of safety research, 41(5),423�431.

International Journal of Injury Control and Safety Promotion 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f O

tago

] at

02:

39 2

2 D

ecem

ber

2014