Preparedness for Fire Emergencies in The Security Industry: Demographic Determinants of Fire Emergency Preparedness in Security Personnel

Effective fire emergency evacuation is critical in minimizing casualties and property damage during fire incidents. Frontline security officers often act as the first responders, making their preparedness essential to ensure swift and organized evacuation operations [1]. Fire emergency preparedness encompasses the knowledge, skills, and readiness required to respond effectively in fire situations, including evacuation procedures, hazard recognition, and use of firefighting equipment [2-4]. Security officers play a vital role in these operations, as they are frequently the initial personnel to detect fires and coordinate occupant evacuation, especially in high-risk environments such as commercial buildings, educational institutions, and critical infrastructure [5-7]. However, despite their frontline role, the preparedness of security officers remains underexplored compared to firefighters and healthcare workers [8, 9]. This lack of focus in the literature represents a critical gap in ensuring comprehensive emergency readiness across occupational groups. As facilities become increasingly complex and densely populated, the preparedness of security officers is more crucial than ever and warrants focused empirical investigation to ensure they are adequately equipped to manage evacuation processes during fire incidents.

Fire emergencies require immediate and coordinated responses to prevent escalation and reduce harm. Security officers are often the first on scene, responsible not only for alerting occupants and emergency services but also for managing crowd control and assisting vulnerable populations. Their role demands not only physical readiness but also mental preparedness to make quick decisions under pressure. Such responsibilities highlight the need for structured and targeted preparedness strategies tailored specifically to their unique operational context. Consequently, comprehensive training programs that enhance both practical skills and psychological resilience are crucial for these personnel [10, 11]. Understanding how demographic factors influence their preparedness helps tailor these programs to meet diverse needs effectively. Emergency preparedness is influenced by several demographic determinants [12], including job description, gender, experience, and frequency of emergency training. Job description shapes the scope of responsibilities and the extent of direct involvement in emergency response, which in turn affects exposure to training and emergency scenarios. For instance, supervisory security personnel may receive different types or levels of training compared to operational staff. Gender differences may impact perceptions of risk, physical capabilities, and communication styles during emergencies, which can influence performance and cooperation [13]. Experience, both in terms of years in service and prior exposure to fire incidents or drills, enhances situational awareness and confidence, contributing to more effective responses.

Training frequency is another critical factor to correlate positively with preparedness levels. Regular drills and refresher courses reinforce emergency protocols, build muscle memory for evacuation procedures, and improve coordination among team members [14, 15]. However, the quality and relevance of training are as important as frequency. Training is realistic, scenario-based, and inclusive of diverse job roles, and tends to be more effective in equipping security officers with necessary competencies [16]. Despite this, limited empirical studies have assessed how these demographic and experiential variables interact to shape overall preparedness among security officers specifically. This oversight may result in ineffective training design and suboptimal resource allocation. Although numerous studies have explored emergency preparedness among firefighting personnel and healthcare workers, limited research addresses security officers as frontline responders [8, 9]. This oversight leaves a critical gap in occupational safety and emergency management literature. In particular, modern facilities present evolving fire risks, and security officers must navigate complex environments with varying roles and responsibilities. Therefore, a nuanced understanding of how demographic factors influence preparedness is essential for developing evidence-based interventions. Filling this gap will inform more targeted, effective interventions to enhance the safety and operational readiness of security personnel, ultimately contributing to safer evacuation outcomes for all building occupants.

This research addresses the gap by empirically examining fire emergency preparedness among security personnel. The study also identifies how demographic factors such as job description, gender, experience, and training frequency can affect their response capabilities. The findings aim to support the design of more effective, context-specific training frameworks and policy strategies to strengthen emergency response systems by security officers. This study can provide valuable insights into the specific needs and strengths of security teams by investigating how demographic variables affect preparedness. These findings have practical implications for organizations and policymakers seeking to design more effective, inclusive, and data-driven emergency preparedness strategies. Ultimately, this study not only addresses a critical research gap but also supports efforts to improve evacuation outcomes, enhance public safety, and build institutional resilience in increasingly complex built environments.

Following the statistical outcomes presented in Table 2, a detailed analysis was conducted to interpret the results for each construct individually. This section presents the findings of the independent samples t-test, conducted to explore gender-based differences in fire emergency preparedness among respondents. The analysis is structured around eleven key constructs, each representing a critical dimension of emergency preparedness and response: Emergency Preparedness on Planning (C1), Fire Protection System (C2), Fire Risk Reduction (C3), Incident Command System and Emergency Response Team (C4), Leadership (C5), Communication in Fire Emergency (C6), Fire Emergency Training (C7), Awareness and Education (C8), Responders’ Emergency Response Capabilities (C9), Organizational Commitment (C10), and Effectiveness of Fire Drill Preparedness (C11). Each construct is measured through multiple items coded from QS1A to QL1F. The objective of this analysis is to determine whether there are statistically significant differences between male and female respondents across these constructs. Understanding these differences provides valuable insights into how gender may influence perceptions, experiences, and competencies related to fire emergency preparedness—thereby supporting more effective and inclusive safety policies and training programs.

1. Construct 1: Emergency Preparedness on Planning (QS1)

There was no significant difference between male and female respondents, t (443) =-0.900, p=0.369; mean difference =-0.0485. This suggests that both genders possess a comparable level of preparedness in terms of planning for fire-related emergencies. Equal exposure to organizational fire safety plans or briefings may contribute to this similarity. This study found that male respondents demonstrated higher awareness of fire protection systems. Previous studies support this finding, which indicates that male participants are more likely to possess sufficient fire safety knowledge due to increased exposure or access to training opportunities [37].

2. Construct 2: Fire Protection System (QS2)

A significant difference was observed, t (443) =2.152, p=0.032; mean difference =0.1151, with males showing greater knowledge of fire protection systems. This could reflect higher technical involvement or training among male staff. This study revealed that male respondents possessed more extensive knowledge of fire protection systems. This outcome aligns with a Namibian study that identified male participants as more likely to have sufficient fire safety knowledge, attributed to higher exposure and training [33].

3. Construct 3: Fire Risk Reduction (QS3)

This study identified significantly greater practical knowledge among male respondents in mitigating fire risks. This finding is consistent with research suggesting male individuals often perceive themselves as more capable in risk-related tasks, likely due to societal expectations [2].

4. Construct 4: Incident Command System & Emergency Response Team (QS4)

A significant difference was detected, t (443) =-2.525, p=0.012; mean difference =-0.1438, with females reporting higher confidence. This may be attributed to a heightened sense of risk awareness or stronger self-efficacy among female respondents during emergency response. Interestingly, this research found that female respondents reported higher confidence in emergency response roles. Although some literature contrasts this result, other studies highlight that female participants may demonstrate strong transformational leadership traits, enhancing team effectiveness during crises [38].

5. Construct 5: Leadership (QH1)

The results showed a significant difference, t (443) =6.089, p<0.001; mean difference = 0.3607, with males scoring higher. This may reflect greater opportunities for males to assume leadership roles in emergency planning or execution, especially in operational departments. This study revealed higher leadership scores among male respondents. This finding is consistent with the literature that males are more likely to hold leadership roles in emergency services, predominantly due to institutional restrictions affecting female personnel [39].

6. Construct 6: Communication in Fire Emergency (QH2)

There was a highly significant difference, t (443) = 7.250, p < 0.001; mean difference = 0.4323, favoring males. This could be due to experience in coordinating emergency responses, particularly in roles where communication is critical, such as safety or technical units. This research found that male participants scored higher in emergency communication, likely due to experience gained in roles requiring coordination during crises. This finding aligns with studies indicating males often dominate technical and communication-intensive safety roles [40].

7. Construct 7: Fire Emergency Training (QH3)

The analysis revealed a significant difference, t (443) =7.470, p<0.001; mean difference =0.4162, with males reporting better response performance during training. The finding points to more frequent or hands-on training exposure among male respondents. This study observed significantly better performance among male respondents in fire emergency training. This result aligns with the findings that males receive more frequent access to hands-on training sessions [33].

8. Construct 8: Awareness and Education (QH4)

A significant difference was found, t (443) =6.193, p<0.001; mean difference =0.4231, indicating higher fire safety awareness and education levels among males. Organizational emphasis on training certain roles (often held by males) may explain this result. This research indicated that male respondents possess higher levels of fire safety awareness and education. This reslut is likely due to greater training emphasis on male-dominated roles, as noted by Johannes and Koray [33].

9. Construct 9: Responders’ Emergency Response Capabilities (QH5)

A very strong and highly significant difference was identified, t (443) =11.984, p<0.001; mean difference=0.7532, again favoring males. This emphasizes a clear gender gap in emergency response skills, likely driven by unequal access to drills or real-life emergency experiences. This study found a clear and highly significant gender gap favoring male respondents in emergency response capabilities. This result is consistent with prior work attributing the gap to differences in access to real-life experience and drill-based training [33].

10. Construct 10: Organizational Commitment (QM1)

A significant difference was recorded, t (443) =3.443, p=0.001; mean difference =0.1927, with males showing greater organizational commitment during fire emergencies. This may be due to job functions that instill greater responsibility or visibility during crises. This study revealed that male respondents exhibited higher organizational commitment during fire emergencies. This finding may be attributed to their more active involvement in emergency roles, as noted by Parkinson et al. [39].

11. Construct 11: Effectiveness of Fire Drill Preparedness (QL1)

No significant difference was found, t (443) =-1.017, p=0.310; mean difference =-0.0584. Both genders perceived the effectiveness of fire drills similarly, suggesting that drill participation may be evenly distributed and accessible. This research found no significant gender difference in perceptions of fire drill effectiveness, supporting the notion that equal training participation results in comparable preparedness levels between male and female staff [37].

The t-test analysis revealed significant gender differences in most areas of fire emergency preparedness, with males generally scoring higher in technical knowledge, leadership, communication, training, awareness, response skills, and commitment. Females showed greater confidence in incident command and emergency response roles. No gender differences were found in emergency planning and fire drill effectiveness, indicating equal participation. These results highlight existing gender gaps but also reflect some areas of equal involvement, suggesting efforts toward inclusive preparedness. Theoretically, these findings can be interpreted through the lens of social role theory [41], which posits that gender differences in behavior often arise from societal expectations rather than inherent ability. The higher male scores in technical domains may stem from traditional role assignments that encourage men to assume operational and leadership positions in emergencies. In contrast, the strong female performance in coordination roles could reflect evolving institutional support for women in managerial capacities. Practically, this study underscores the need for targeted interventions to bridge identified gaps. While general training may suffice for basic preparedness, tailored modules that address the specific developmental needs of different gender groups could enhance overall performance.

3.3 Fire emergency training attended

The distribution of respondents based on their attendance in fire emergency preparedness training. The findings reveal that a large majority of respondents (n=358, 80.4%) reported having no or little training related to fire emergencies. In contrast, only 87 respondents (19.6%) indicated that they had attended such training more than once. An independent samples t-test was conducted to examine differences in mean scores between respondents who had previously attended emergency preparedness training and those who had not. The results are shown in Table 3.

Based on the t-test results provided, here is a detailed discussion and justification in English for each construct (C1-C11) comparing those who have attended fire emergency training more than once versus those with no or little training:

1. Construct 1: Emergency Preparedness on Planning (QS1)

t (443) =1.604, p=0.109. This study found that no statistically significant difference was found between the two groups. Although the group with more training had a slightly higher mean (3.6759 vs. 3.5944), the difference is not significant (p>0.05). This suggests that basic awareness of procedures may already be established among all employees, regardless of training frequence. The lack of statistical significance suggests that basic emergency preparedness planning knowledge may already be widespread among employees, regardless of training frequency. This aligns with findings by Farika et al. [42], who observed that foundational knowledge can be effectively disseminated through initial training sessions, leading to a plateau effect with additional sessions. The results also resonate with Anderson’s ACT-R theory [43], which differentiates between declarative and procedural knowledge. It is possible that most employees have transitioned declarative knowledge (knowing what to do) into procedural knowledge (knowing how to do it) after initial training. However, ACT-R also emphasizes that performance under pressure depends on contextualized rehearsal. Without stress simulation or emotionally charged training environments, procedural knowledge may not be sufficiently integrated to influence psychological preparedness during real emergencies.

2. Construct 2: Fire Protection System (QS2)

t (443) =5.404, p<0.001, it means there is statistically significant difference. Participants with more training scored significantly higher, indicating repeated training enhances knowledge retention, especially on technical details such as evacuation routes. This finding aligns with Anderson’s ACT-R (Adaptive Control of Thought-Rational) theory, which posits that repeated practice strengthens declarative and procedural memory, thereby improving task performance over time. The statistically significant difference observed supports the notion that repeated training transitions knowledge from declarative (what to do) to procedural (how to do it) forms, enabling faster and more effective responses during emergencies. A significant difference indicates that repeated training enhances understanding of fire protection systems. This result is consistent with the findings of [44], who reported that immersive training methods, such as virtual reality simulations, significantly enhance the retention and application of fire safety knowledge. Despite the clarity of the statistical results, the discussion could benefit from further integration of practical implications. For instance, organizations should consider implementing scheduled, iterative training sessions rather than one-time briefings to promote sustained preparedness among personnel. Furthermore, integrating technology-enhanced training could provide consistent, scalable, and cost-effective improvements in knowledge retention and emergency response readiness. Future research might also explore longitudinal effects of repeated training to determine how long the acquired knowledge remains effective without retraining.

3. Construct 3: Fire Risk Reduction (QS3)

t (443) =5.043, p<0.001. This study found that there is statistically significant difference. The large mean difference (0.543) implies that repeated exposure to training improves confidence, a critical component in effective emergency response. From a cognitive psychology perspective, this finding aligns with Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory [45], particularly the concept of self-efficacy the belief in one's ability to succeed in specific situations. Repeated training boosts self-efficacy by providing mastery experiences, reinforcing participants' belief in their capability to handle fire emergencies. The significant improvement suggests that repeated training bolsters confidence in fire risk reduction strategies. Casey et al. [46] emphasized that ongoing engagement in safety training programs leads to better risk assessment and mitigation skills among participants.

4. Construct 4: Incident Command System & Emergency Response Team (QS4)

t (443) =1.846, p=0.066. This study found that there is marginally non-significant (just above p =0.05). While training seems to improve understanding, this result suggests either the content is not emphasized enough in training, or the baseline knowledge is already moderate. The marginal significance implies that while training aids understanding, it may not be sufficient alone. The importance of integrating practical exercises with theoretical knowledge to enhance comprehension of incident command structures [47]. From a learning theory perspective, Kolb’s Experiential Learning Theory [48] supports this approach, advocating for a cycle of concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation. Simply delivering information in a classroom format may not ensure retention or application unless learners engage in active, experiential learning processes that simulate decision-making within command hierarchies.

5. Construct 5: Leadership (QH1)

t (443) =6.555, p<0.001. This result indicates a highly statistically significant difference between individuals who have attended fire emergency training more than once and those with no or minimal training. The group with more frequent training reported markedly higher leadership competence during fire emergencies. This reflects the fact that leadership during crises, such as making decisions, delegating roles, and maintaining team coordination, is a practical skill that develops most effectively through repeated exposure and hands-on experience. This finding is supported by Iserson [49], who found that repetitive emergency response drills enhance leadership behavior, especially in high-stress scenarios. Their study on industrial safety training concluded that repeated participation in fire drills improved not only procedural compliance but also decisiveness and team guidance, key indicators of leadership readiness in emergencies. This is likely because familiarity with emergency protocols reduces cognitive load, allowing leaders to focus on managing people and delegating tasks [50]. Those with repeated training develop stronger operational leadership competencies, reinforcing the importance of continuous professional development and practical engagement in emergency preparedness programs. These findings align with Cognitive Load Theory [51], which posits that learning environments should reduce extraneous cognitive burden to improve task performance under pressure. When emergency protocols become internalized through repetition, individuals are better equipped to focus on adaptive leadership behaviors, rather than recalling basic procedural steps.

6. Construct 6: Communication in Fire Emergency (QH2)

t (443) =6.924, p<0.001. This study found that there is a statistically significant. The high significance suggests repeated training helps internalize procedures, thus improving reaction time during emergencies. Significant findings suggest that repeated training enhances communication effectiveness during fire emergencies. The regular training ensures operable and interoperable communications among responders [52]. In fire emergencies, clear and coordinated communication is critical to ensuring rapid evacuation, role execution, and minimizing panic. Participants who underwent repeated training likely internalized standard operating procedures (SOPs) more effectively, allowing for faster and more accurate communication under pressure. This includes relaying alerts, giving instructions, using communication equipment, and updating emergency teams in real time.

7. Construct 7: Fire Emergency Training (QH3)

t (443) =9.105, p<0.001. This study found that there is very strong statistical significance. Repeated training builds leadership readiness. Staff who practice regularly are more confident in guiding others during crises. The result shows a very strong statistically significant difference between participants who have undergone fire emergency training more than once and those with limited or no training. The substantial t-value and highly significant p-value (p<0.001) indicate that repeated training significantly enhances participants’ preparedness and confidence during fire emergencies. Those with multiple training exposures are better equipped to execute emergency procedures, respond under pressure, and guide others safely, suggesting that training frequency is directly linked to operational readiness and leadership performance during crises. Consistent training reinforces familiarity with safety protocols, increases response efficiency, and builds the self-efficacy needed to take initiative during emergencies. This is consistent with [53], reported that repeated fire training significantly improved participants’ procedural competence and leadership behavior, particularly in industrial and educational settings. Similarly, Safari et al. [54] state that staff who received structured and repeated emergency training demonstrated superior performance in both simulation exercises and real-life evacuation scenarios. These individuals were more likely to lead evacuation efforts, coordinate team roles, and maintain calm under pressure traits essential for fire safety leadership. Repeated fire emergency training is essential for building confidence, procedural mastery, and leadership readiness. Employees who engage in regular drills are more competent and better prepared to take charge and assist others during fire-related emergencies, highlighting the need for organizations to implement continuous and hands-on training programs.

8. Construct 8: Awareness and Education (QH4)

A significant difference was found in the Awareness and Education construct between individuals who have attended fire emergency training more than once and those with no or little training, t (443) =7.269, p<0.001. This result indicates that repeated exposure to training significantly enhances awareness levels and educational understanding of fire emergency preparedness. Respondents who had undergone training multiple times demonstrated greater familiarity with emergency tools, procedures, and safety protocols. This group was more likely to exhibit proactive safety behavior, recognize potential hazards, and respond appropriately in emergency situations. In contrast, individuals with minimal or no training showed lower preparedness levels, which may compromise safety during actual emergencies. This finding aligns with previous studies highlighting that the frequency and quality of emergency preparedness training have a direct impact on individuals’ readiness and response efficiency [55, 56]. Therefore, this study underscores the necessity of continuous and repeated training initiatives as a cornerstone of effective fire emergency preparedness strategies. Institutions should prioritize regular training programs to build and maintain high levels of awareness and education among staff and students.

9. Construct 9: Responders’ Emergency Response Capabilities (QH5)

The study found a highly significant difference in Responders’ Emergency Response Capabilities between individuals who have attended training more than once and those with no or little training, t (443) =9.665, p<0.001. This indicates that repeated training plays a critical role in strengthening the practical skills and confidence required to perform essential emergency duties effectively. Participants with multiple training experiences showed enhanced competence in executing designated emergency roles such as administering first aid, operating fire extinguishers, initiating containment procedures, and coordinating evacuation efforts. This improvement is attributed to the cumulative effect of hands-on experience and knowledge retention gained through repeated drills and realistic simulations. In contrast, individuals with limited or no training lacked the necessary readiness and clarity to respond promptly and effectively under pressure. This outcome is strongly supported by prior research, which asserts that response performance improves significantly with increased training frequency [57]. These findings underscore the importance of implementing routine, role-specific emergency preparedness programs. Institutions should ensure that all potential responders particularly those assigned critical functions undergo regular refresher training to maintain high operational readiness and reduce response times during fire emergencies.

10. Construct 10: Organizational Commitment (QM1)

The analysis revealed a statistically significant difference in Organizational Commitment between individuals who have attended fire emergency training more than once and those with no or little training, t (443) =4.678, p<0.001. This finding suggests that repeated exposure to training enhances individuals’ sense of responsibility and alignment with organizational safety goals and protocols. Participants who had undergone multiple training sessions demonstrated a higher level of commitment to organizational emergency procedures. This is largely attributed to the role-playing and scenario-based components embedded in repeated training sessions, which reinforce clear communication, accountability, and collaborative problem-solving. These individuals are more likely to internalize safety responsibilities, actively engage in emergency planning, and exhibit a stronger adherence to the organization’s emergency protocols during real incidents. This result aligns with previous studies that highlight the role of continuous training in cultivating a safety-oriented organizational culture and strengthening employees’ emotional and behavioral commitment to safety practices [58, 59]. In contrast, those with little or no training tend to exhibit lower levels of engagement and understanding of organizational safety expectations, which can hinder coordinated emergency responses. Therefore, regular and structured training not only builds technical competency but also deepens organizational commitment among staff and emergency responders. From a theoretical standpoint, this outcome can be interpreted through the lens of Organizational Commitment Theory by Meyer and Allen [60], which posits that affective commitment, defined as the emotional attachment to and identification with an organization, increases when employees perceive that their actions meaningfully contribute to the organization’s goals. Repeated and meaningful training reinforces this connection by signaling that the organization places a high value on safety and preparedness. Such training not only communicates organizational priorities but also empowers employees with the skills, confidence, and sense of responsibility needed to fulfill those priorities. As a result, employees are more likely to internalize safety practices, actively participate in emergency preparedness, and align their behavior with the organization’s safety culture.

11. Construct 11: Effectiveness of Fire Drill Preparedness (QL1)

The analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the Effectiveness of Fire Drill Preparedness between individuals who have attended training more than once and those with no or little training, t (443) =0.497, p=0.620. This suggests that repeated training does not necessarily result in notable differences in perceived effectiveness or psychological readiness during fire drills. Interestingly, despite differing levels of exposure to training, both groups reported similar levels of calmness and composure during fire drills. This finding implies that technical training alone may not be sufficient to influence psychological responses such as anxiety, panic control, or mental clarity in high-stress emergency situations. Emotional and psychological readiness is complex and may require targeted interventions beyond procedural instruction. Previous studies have highlighted that while technical skills can be taught through standard drills, managing emotional responses often requires additional strategies such as stress management programs, resilience training, or simulations conducted under realistic, high-pressure conditions [61, 62].

Therefore, this result indicates a potential gap in existing training frameworks and points to the need for a more holistic approach to fire emergency preparedness one that integrates cognitive-behavioral strategies alongside procedural instruction to better equip individuals for real-life emergencies. From a theoretical perspective, this aligns with Bandura’s [45] Social Cognitive Theory, which posits that self-efficacy and performance in high-stress situations are influenced not only by knowledge and skills, but also by emotional arousal and coping mechanisms. The absence of statistically significant improvement despite repeated training may indicate a lack of emotional reinforcement or contextual realism in the training programs. The t-test results strongly suggest that repeated fire emergency training improves preparedness in most constructs. Constructs related to knowledge, operational skills, and leadership (C2, C3, C5-C10) show significant differences favoring those with more frequent training. However, general awareness and psychological factors (C1, C4, C11) do not show statistically significant improvements, indicating these may require different or additional interventions.

In addition to training frequency, the effectiveness of fire emergency preparedness is also strongly influenced by the content and delivery format of the training itself. Repeated exposure to training may enhance procedural memory, but without engaging and context-specific content, its impact on higher-order competencies such as planning, command structure comprehension, and psychological readiness may remain limited. Passive formats, such as lectures or briefings, are often insufficient to develop the applied skills and confidence required during real emergencies. Instead, experiential training approaches, including scenario-based simulations, role-playing exercises, and realistic drills, have been shown to significantly enhance both knowledge retention and practical response capabilities [48, 44]. Moreover, cognitive-behavioral strategies such as stress inoculation and resilience-building exercises should be incorporated to address psychological aspects of preparedness that are not effectively developed through technical training alone [61, 62]. Therefore, organizations should prioritize interactive, immersive, and role-specific training modules, incorporating decision-making tasks under pressure, stress-management techniques, and contextual realism to cultivate both technical proficiency and emotional resilience. Future training programs should also be tailored to job roles and organizational contexts, ensuring that personnel develop competencies most relevant to their emergency functions, thereby enhancing overall institutional readiness and safety culture. This broader perspective ensures that emergency preparedness is not only procedural but also adaptive, psychologically robust, and practically applicable in high-stakes situations.