Table 5.
The reasons for workers’ cognitive failure in different situations.
| Parameter | Case 1 | Case 2 | Case 3 | Case 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| AR | 0.480 | 0.439 | 0.439 | 0.439 |
| PR | 0 | 0.522 | 0.453 | 0.595 |
| UR | 0 | 0.343 | 0.573 | 0.478 |
| RA | 0.716 | 0.475 | 0.629 | 0.403 |
| UB | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| AT | 0.931 | 0.656 | 0.844 | 0.578 |
| WN | 0.596 | 0.471 | 0.457 | 0.305 |
| FN | 0.676 | 0.258 | 0.342 | 0.237 |
| MN | 0.228 | 0.239 | 0.486 | 0.150 |
| ST | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| FCN | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| KL | 0.832 | 0.841 | 1.107 | 1.134 |
| SA | 0.832 | 0.841 | 1.007 | 1.034 |
Note: AR = actual risk, PR = risk perceiving, UR = risk understating, RA = risk acceptance, UB = unsafe behavior, AT = worker’s attitude, WN = coworker norm, FN = foreman norm, MN = manager norm, ST = safety training, FCN = foreman communication frequency, KL = worker’s safety knowledge, SA = worker’s safety awareness