A Study on Gravity Perception, Causal Attributions and Risk Perception in the Work Accidents Victims Colleagues
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v5i2.327Keywords:
accident severity, causal attribution, risk perception, comparative optimism, bad luck, errorAbstract
The influence of causal explanations on the attitudes and behaviours of victims of work accidents is frequently testified. Studies highlight the reality of self-defensive bias, preserving the individual from the feelings of uncertainty and control loss. Focused on the colleagues of accident victims, this research, based on semi-structured interviews with 38 manual technical workers, showed that causal explanations refer mainly to bad luck or to the victims' errors, this result varying according to accident severity. Workers with the same occupation and the same status estimated the severity of their colleague's accident to be lower than that of other workers. Comparative optimism bias was observed for those who declare not to have modified their behaviours in the aftermath of the accident.
Downloads
Download data is not yet available.
References
Beauvois, J-L., Deschamps, J-C., & Schadron, G. (2005). Vers la cognition sociale. In N. Dubois (Dir.). Psychologie sociale de la cognition (pp. 5-87), Paris: Dunod.
Chappé, J., Verlhiac, J-F., & Meyer, T. (2007). Optimisme et pessimisme comparatifs consécutifs à l’exposition à plusieurs messages menaçants. Revue européenne de psychologie appliquée, 57, 23-35
Gyekye, S.A. & Salminen, S. (2004). Causal Attributions of Ghanaian industrial Workers for Accident Occurrence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 11, 2324-2342.
Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.
Hellemans, C. (2006). Analyse et gestion des risques relatifs au bien-être au travail et à la charge psychosociale. Document interne.
Bruxelles: Université libre de Bruxelles.
Kouabenan, D. R., Gilibert, D., Medina, M., & Bouzon, F. (2001). Hierarchical position, gender, accident severity, and causal attribution. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 3, 553-575.
Kouabenan, D.R. (1985a). L’analyse des attributions causales des accidents. Le Travail humain, 48, 1, 1-17.
Kouabenan, D.R. (1985b). Degree of involvement in an accident and causal attribution. Journal of occupational accidents, 7, 187-194.
Kouabenan, D.R. (1998). Beliefs and the perception of risks and accidents. Risk Analysis, 18, 3, 243-252.
Kouabenan, D.R. (1999). Explication naïve des accidents et prévention. Paris: PUF.
Kouabenan, D.R. (2000). Décision, perception du risque et sécurité. In Bernaud, J-L. et Lemoine, Cl. Traité de psychologie du travail et des organisations (pp. 279-321). Paris: Ed. Dunod.
Kouabenan, D.R. (2007). Incertitude, croyances et management de la sécurité. Le Travail Humain, 70(3), 271-287.
Kouabenan, D.R., Cadet, B., Hermand, D., & Muñoz Sastre, M.T. (2006). Psychologie du risque: Identifier, évaluer, prévenir. Bruxelles: Ed. De Boeck.
Leplat, J. (1995). Cause et risque dans l’analyse des accidents. Revue roumaine de psychologie, 39, 9-24.
McKillip, J. & Posavac, E.J. (1976). Judgments of responsibility for an accident. Journal of personality, 43, 248-265.
Méric, M., Monteau, M., & Szekely, J. (1976). Technique de gestion de la sécurité. L’analyse des accidents du travail et l’emploi de la notion de facteurs potentiels d’accidents pour la prévention des risques professionnels. Rapport n° 243/RE. Paris: INRS.
Milhabet, I, Desrichard, O., & Verlhiac, J-F. (2002). Comparaison sociale et perception des risques: l’optimisme comparatif. In J-L. Beauvois, R-V. Joulé, & J-M. Monteil (Eds), Perspectives cognitives et conduites sociales (pp. 215-245), Rennes, France: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
Monteau, M., & Pham, D. (1987). L’accident du travail: évolution des conceptions. In Cl. Levy-Leboyer & J-Cl. Sperandio, Traité de psychologie du travail (pp. 703-727). Paris: P.U.F.
Myers, D.G. (1997). Introduction à la psychologie sociale, Montréal, Canada: Chenelière, Mc Graw-Hill.
Pansu, P. & Gilibert, D. (2002). Effect of Causal Explanations on Work-related Judgments. Applied Psychology: an International Review, 51, 4, 505-526
Rotter, J.B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80, 1.
Salminen, S. (1992). Defensive attribution hypothesis and serious occupational accidents. Psychological Reports, 70, 1195- 1199.
Shaw, J.L. & McMartin, J.A. (1977). Personal and situational determinants of attribution of responsibility for an accident. Human Relations, 30, 1, 95-107.
Turbiaux, M. (1971). Les facteurs humains des accidents du travail. Bulletin de Psychologie, 24, 952-960.
Walster, E. (1967). « Second Guessing » Important Events. Human Relations, 20, 239-250.
Weill-Fassina, A., Kouabenan, D.R., & De la Garza, C. (2004). Analyse des accidents du travail, gestion des risques et prévention. In Brangier, E., Lancry, A., & Louche, C. Les Dimensions Humaines du Travail: Théorie et pratique de psychologie du travail et des organisations (pp.251-283). Nancy, France: Presses Universitaires de Nancy.
Chappé, J., Verlhiac, J-F., & Meyer, T. (2007). Optimisme et pessimisme comparatifs consécutifs à l’exposition à plusieurs messages menaçants. Revue européenne de psychologie appliquée, 57, 23-35
Gyekye, S.A. & Salminen, S. (2004). Causal Attributions of Ghanaian industrial Workers for Accident Occurrence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 34, 11, 2324-2342.
Heider, F. (1958). The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.
Hellemans, C. (2006). Analyse et gestion des risques relatifs au bien-être au travail et à la charge psychosociale. Document interne.
Bruxelles: Université libre de Bruxelles.
Kouabenan, D. R., Gilibert, D., Medina, M., & Bouzon, F. (2001). Hierarchical position, gender, accident severity, and causal attribution. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 3, 553-575.
Kouabenan, D.R. (1985a). L’analyse des attributions causales des accidents. Le Travail humain, 48, 1, 1-17.
Kouabenan, D.R. (1985b). Degree of involvement in an accident and causal attribution. Journal of occupational accidents, 7, 187-194.
Kouabenan, D.R. (1998). Beliefs and the perception of risks and accidents. Risk Analysis, 18, 3, 243-252.
Kouabenan, D.R. (1999). Explication naïve des accidents et prévention. Paris: PUF.
Kouabenan, D.R. (2000). Décision, perception du risque et sécurité. In Bernaud, J-L. et Lemoine, Cl. Traité de psychologie du travail et des organisations (pp. 279-321). Paris: Ed. Dunod.
Kouabenan, D.R. (2007). Incertitude, croyances et management de la sécurité. Le Travail Humain, 70(3), 271-287.
Kouabenan, D.R., Cadet, B., Hermand, D., & Muñoz Sastre, M.T. (2006). Psychologie du risque: Identifier, évaluer, prévenir. Bruxelles: Ed. De Boeck.
Leplat, J. (1995). Cause et risque dans l’analyse des accidents. Revue roumaine de psychologie, 39, 9-24.
McKillip, J. & Posavac, E.J. (1976). Judgments of responsibility for an accident. Journal of personality, 43, 248-265.
Méric, M., Monteau, M., & Szekely, J. (1976). Technique de gestion de la sécurité. L’analyse des accidents du travail et l’emploi de la notion de facteurs potentiels d’accidents pour la prévention des risques professionnels. Rapport n° 243/RE. Paris: INRS.
Milhabet, I, Desrichard, O., & Verlhiac, J-F. (2002). Comparaison sociale et perception des risques: l’optimisme comparatif. In J-L. Beauvois, R-V. Joulé, & J-M. Monteil (Eds), Perspectives cognitives et conduites sociales (pp. 215-245), Rennes, France: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.
Monteau, M., & Pham, D. (1987). L’accident du travail: évolution des conceptions. In Cl. Levy-Leboyer & J-Cl. Sperandio, Traité de psychologie du travail (pp. 703-727). Paris: P.U.F.
Myers, D.G. (1997). Introduction à la psychologie sociale, Montréal, Canada: Chenelière, Mc Graw-Hill.
Pansu, P. & Gilibert, D. (2002). Effect of Causal Explanations on Work-related Judgments. Applied Psychology: an International Review, 51, 4, 505-526
Rotter, J.B. (1966). Generalized expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs, 80, 1.
Salminen, S. (1992). Defensive attribution hypothesis and serious occupational accidents. Psychological Reports, 70, 1195- 1199.
Shaw, J.L. & McMartin, J.A. (1977). Personal and situational determinants of attribution of responsibility for an accident. Human Relations, 30, 1, 95-107.
Turbiaux, M. (1971). Les facteurs humains des accidents du travail. Bulletin de Psychologie, 24, 952-960.
Walster, E. (1967). « Second Guessing » Important Events. Human Relations, 20, 239-250.
Weill-Fassina, A., Kouabenan, D.R., & De la Garza, C. (2004). Analyse des accidents du travail, gestion des risques et prévention. In Brangier, E., Lancry, A., & Louche, C. Les Dimensions Humaines du Travail: Théorie et pratique de psychologie du travail et des organisations (pp.251-283). Nancy, France: Presses Universitaires de Nancy.
Downloads
Published
2020-01-20
How to Cite
van de Leemput, C. ., & Amelin, O. (2020). A Study on Gravity Perception, Causal Attributions and Risk Perception in the Work Accidents Victims Colleagues. Psihologia Resurselor Umane, 5(2), 48–57. https://doi.org/10.24837/pru.v5i2.327
Issue
Section
Research articles
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal,it also allows for use of the work for non-commercial purposes and if others remix, transform or build upon the works found in this journal they must distribute the contributions under the same licence as the original.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See: The Effect of Open Access).
