OPEN ACCESS
More than 50% of industrial accidents in the manufacturing industry are caused in nonstationary work. In nonstationary work, the worker’s behavior characteristics appear most easily. If the behavioral characteristics are classified into some types and the feature and the danger of the type are recognized, they can be put in the safety management item, and the prevention of the disaster in nonstationary work becomes possible. Worker’s action characteristics can be modeled as a combination in order of preference of three elements: risk prediction, risk avoidance and risk transmission. The behavioral characteristics of workers can also be modeled as the combination in order of preference with the aforementioned three elements. In previous research, it has been found that the models were classified as 14 kinds of behavior patterns. In this study, we report on the following research results. We have developed a testing apparatus to measure the consciousness level about risk prediction, avoidance and propagation, and the presence of 14 kinds of patterns of behavioral characteristics was verified. The relationships between the behavior type and the dangerousness, the behavior type and the mistake occurrence were examined experimentally.
behavioral characteristic, human factor, infrequent operation, psychological tests, risk reduction, risk-taking situations
[1] Sugimoto, H., Maintenance work and safety for production machine. Reliability Engineering Association of Japan, 25(7), pp. 690–694, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2016.11.001
[2] Baba, F., Research on the sTable equipment maintenance activities based on the PDCA cycle –The information link and division by class of a production activity as the foundation. YOKOHAMA International Society Study Research, 2(2), pp. 210–211, 2012.
[3] Esaki, K., Yamada, S., Takahashi, M. & HIhara, K., A quality engineering approach to human factors affecting software reliability in design process. The Journal of the Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers, J83-A(7), pp. 875–882, 2000.
[4] Najamura, M., Analysis of human errors in marine engine accidents. Research Reports of the Yuge National College of Maritime Technology, 34, pp. 14–19, 2012.
[5] Matuoka, T., System reliability analysis in consideration of human action and an equipment failure-Approach by the GO-FLOW technique, available at http://www.mech.utsunomiya-u.ac.jp/safety/gf_mmi.htm, 2013
[6] Japan Society Maintenology. Examination about a preservation program and an inspection. The Data of Investigative Commission about the State of the 20th Inspection, pp. 6–11, 2006.
[7] Atunobu, I., Theory of decision making. Kyoritu Shuppan Co. Ltd, pp. 4–7, 1983.