Environmental variables can affect employee safety in different ways. These variables can reduce attention and concentration and cause distraction. Numerous studies have been conducted to examine the impact of distraction on safety, with results that have been inconsistent.
Objective
Based on a comprehensive literature review, we propose the hypothesis that environmental distractions can affect safety behavior either directly or indirectly through other factors. This study was conducted to investigate this hypothesis.
Methods
This cross-sectional analytical study was conducted on 474 employees from manufacturing industries in Iran. Data were collected through a self-report questionnaire. Data analysis was performed using the path analysis method in IBM SPSS AMOS 24.0 software. The validity of the model was assessed using the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA), comparative fit index (CFI), and the coefficient of determination (R²).
Results
Based on the results of the path analysis and model fit indices (CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.99, χ²/df = 1.09, RMSEA = 0.014), environmental distraction indirectly affects safety behavior through fatigue, human–systems interaction, and situation awareness. The findings indicated that environmental distraction did not have a significant direct effect on safety behavior. Among the four variables studied, situation awareness had the greatest impact on safety behavior.
Conclusions
The study results indicated that more favorable workplace conditions (such as noise levels, temperature, colleagues’ traffic, crowded work environments, and availability of private space) help prevent fatigue and improve human–system interaction. Consequently, reduced fatigue and enhanced human–system interaction lead to greater situation awareness and safer behaviors.
ChoudhryRM. Implementation of BBS and the impact of site-level commitment. Journal of Professional Issues in Engineering Education and Practice2012; 138: 296–304.
2.
ChenD-WRenD. Behavior based safety (BBS) for accident prevention and positive study in construction enterprise.In2015 International conference on management engineering and management innovation (ICMEMI-15). Changsha, China10–11 January. Paris, France: Atlantis Press; 2015. pp. 50–57.
3.
GuoBHGohYMWongKLX. A system dynamics view of a behavior-based safety program in the construction industry. Safety Science2018; 104: 202–215.
4.
GhasemiFKalatpourOMoghimbeigiA,et al.A neural network classifier model for forecasting safety behavior at workplaces. Iranian journal of health. Safety and Environment2017; 4: 835–843.
5.
MahmoudiSFamIAfsartalaB,et al.Evaluation of relationship between the rate of unsafe behaviors and personality trait case study: construction project in a car manufacturing company. Journal of Health and Safety at Work2014; 3: 51–58.
6.
SamaniSARasidSZASofianS. The influence of personal control and environmental distraction in open-plan offices on creative outcome. Performance Improvement Quarterly2017; 30: 5–28.
7.
LeeSYBrandJ. Can personal control over the physical environment ease distractions in office workplaces?Ergonomics2010; 53: 324–335.
8.
HoffEVÖbergNK. The role of the physical work environment for creative employees–a case study of digital artists. The International Journal of Human Resource Management2015; 26: 1889–1906.
9.
ByrneJLudington-HoeSMVossJG. Occupational heat stress, thermal comfort, and cognitive performance in the OR: an integrative review. AORN journal2020; 111: 536–545.
10.
FletcherKAPotterSMTelfordBN. Stress outcomes of four types of perceived interruptions. Human Factors2018; 60: 222–235.
11.
NamianMAlbertAFengJ. Effect of distraction on hazard recognition and safety risk perception. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management2018; 144: 04018008.
12.
NnajiCGambateseJA. Worker distraction impacts on safety and work quality: An energy component.Construction Research Congress 2016San Juan, Puerto RicoMay 31–June 2.Reston, Virginia, USA: American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE); 2016. pp. 3005–3014.
13.
RoskamsMHaynesB. An experience sampling approach to the workplace environment survey. Facilities2020; 38(1/2): 72–85.
14.
LeeSYBrandJL. Effects of control over office workspace on perceptions of the work environment and work outcomes. Journal of Environmental Psychology2005; 25: 323–333.
15.
VredeveldtAPerfectTJ. Reduction of environmental distraction to facilitate cognitive performance. Frontiers in psychology2014; 6(5): 1–3.
16.
WheelockASulimanAWhartonR, et al.The impact of operating room distractions on stress, workload, and teamwork. Annals of Surgery2015; 261: 1079–1084.
17.
MohammadfamIMahdiniaMSoltanzadehA, et al.A path analysis model of individual variables predicting safety behavior and human error: the mediating effect of situation awareness. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics2021; 84: 103144.
18.
KaberDJinSZahabiM,et al.The effect of driver cognitive abilities and distractions on situation awareness and performance under hazard conditions. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour2016; 42: 177–194.
19.
KimHHongJLeeS. Investigating impact of situation awareness-based displays of semi-autonomous driving in urgent situations. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour2024; 105: 454–472.
20.
YoungKLSalmonPMCornelissenM. Missing links? The effects of distraction on driver situation awareness. Safety Science2013; 56: 36–43.
21.
KianiFKhodabakhshMR. Examining the role of fatigue and cognitive failures in predicting work situation awareness among employees of pars khodro company. Journal of Ergonomics2017; 4: 41–47.
22.
LiBWangEShangZ, et al.Quantification study of working fatigue state affected by coal mine noise exposure based on fuzzy comprehensive evaluation. Safety Science2022; 146: 105577.
23.
ChoiSChoiASungM. Cloud-based lighting control systems: fatigue analysis and recommended luminous environments. Building and Environment2022; 214: 108947.
24.
PratiwiAN. The correlation between physical environmental factors and fatigue of the workers at ship repair workshop. The Indonesian Journal Of Occupational Safety and Health2019; 8: 274–282.
25.
AhmadSVarshneyASinghalS, et al.Effect of environmental parameters on performance and fatigue of a worker performing a metal pouring operationErgonomics for Improved Productivity Proceedings of HWWE 2017. Gateway East, Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd; 2021, pp.181–187.
26.
BizamaFMedleyATrudelle-JacksonE,et al.The effect of visual environmental distraction on gait performance in children. Physical & Occupational Therapy In Pediatrics2018; 38: 64–73.
27.
WinwoodPCWinefieldAHDawsonD,et al.Development and validation of a scale to measure work-related fatigue and recovery: the occupational fatigue exhaustion/recovery scale (OFER). Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine2005; 47: 594–606.
28.
SertHGulbahar ErenMUcgulK. Occupational fatigue, compassion competence and caring behaviours of intensive care nurses: A structural equation modelling approach. Nursing in Critical Care2024; 29(4): 734–744.
29.
ISO. ISO 6385: Ergonomics principles in the design of work systems. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO; 2016.
30.
SageAPRouseWB. Handbook of systems engineering and management. 2nd ed. Hoboken, new jersey: Wiley, 2014.
31.
PfautzSLGanbergGFouseA,et al.A general context-aware framework for improved human-system interactions. Ai Magazine2015; 36: 42–49.
32.
SandhålandHOltedalHAHystadSW,et al.Effects of leadership style and psychological job demands on situation awareness and the willingness to take a risk: a survey of selected offshore vessels. Safety Science2017; 93: 178–186.
33.
SætrevikBHystadSW. Situation awareness as a determinant for unsafe actions and subjective risk assessment on offshore attendant vessels. Safety Science2017; 93: 214–221.
34.
SneddonAMearnsKFlinR. Stress, fatigue, situation awareness and safety in offshore drilling crews. Safety Science2013; 56: 80–88.
35.
LiuXHuangGHuangH, et al.Safety climate, safety behavior, and worker injuries in the Chinese manufacturing industry. Safety Science2015; 78: 173–178.
36.
VinodkumarMBhasiM. A study on the impact of management system certification on safety management. Safety Science2011; 49: 498–507.
37.
DahlØKongsvikT. Safety climate and mindful safety practices in the oil and gas industry. Journal of Safety Research2018; 64: 29–36.
38.
Martínez-CórcolesMGraciaFTomásI,et al.Leadership and employees’ perceived safety behaviours in a nuclear power plant: a structural equation model. Safety Science2011; 49: 1118–1129.
39.
MohammadfamIMahdiniaMAliabadiMM,et al.Effect of safety climate on safety behavior and occupational injuries: a systematic review study. Safety Science2022; 156: 105917.
40.
MahdiniaMArsanqjangSSadeghiA, et al.Development and validation of a questionnaire for safety behavior assessment. Iran Occupational Health Journal2016; 13: 92–102.
41.
IslamRKhanFAbbassiR,et al.Human error assessment during maintenance operations of marine systems–what are the effective environmental factors?Safety Science2018; 107: 85–98.
42.
TecheraUHallowellMStambaughN,et al.Causes and consequences of occupational fatigue: meta-analysis and systems model. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine2016; 58: 961–973.
43.
GriffithCDMahadevanS. Human reliability under sleep deprivation: derivation of performance shaping factor multipliers from empirical data. Reliability Engineering & System Safety2015; 144: 23–34.
44.
ChanM. Fatigue: the most critical accident risk in oil and gas construction. Construction Management and Economics2011; 29: 341–353.
45.
PowellRCoppingA. Sleep deprivation and its consequences in construction workers. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management2010; 136: 1086–1092.
46.
HystadSNielsenMEidJ. The impact of sleep quality, fatigue and safety climate on the perceptions of accident risk among seafarers. European Review of Applied Psychology2017; 67: 259–267.
47.
FangDJiangZZhangM,et al.An experimental method to study the effect of fatigue on construction workers’ safety performance. Safety Science2015; 73: 80–91.
48.
ZhangZXiangTGuoH, et al.Impact of physical and mental fatigue on construction workers’ unsafe behavior based on physiological measurement. Journal of Safety Research2023; 85: 457–468.
49.
GriffithCDMahadevanS. Inclusion of fatigue effects in human reliability analysis. Reliability Engineering & System Safety2011; 96: 1437–1447.
50.
RoetsBChristiaensJ. Shift work, fatigue, and human error: an empirical analysis of railway traffic control. Journal of Transportation Safety & Security2019; 11: 207–224.
51.
SteegeLMDrakeDAOlivasM,et al.Evaluation of physically and mentally fatiguing tasks and sources of fatigue as reported by registered nurses. Journal of Nursing Management2015; 23: 179–189.
52.
ZhangFde DearRHancockP. Effects of moderate thermal environments on cognitive performance: a multidisciplinary review. Applied Energy2019; 236: 760–777.
53.
JahnckeHHyggeSHalinN, et al.Open-plan office noise: cognitive performance and restoration. Journal of Environmental Psychology2011; 31: 373–382.
54.
HuangF-HHwangS-LYennT-C, et al.Evaluation and comparison of alarm reset modes in advanced control room of nuclear power plants. Safety Science2006; 44: 935–946.
55.
KaberDBPerryCMSegallN,et al.Situation awareness implications of adaptive automation for information processing in an air traffic control-related task. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 2006;36:447–462.
56.
LinCJYennT-CYangC-W. Optimizing human–system interface automation design based on a skill-rule-knowledge framework. Nuclear Engineering and Design2010; 240: 1897–1905.
57.
NaderpourMLuJZhangG. A human-system interface risk assessment method based on mental models. Safety Science2015; 79: 286–297.
58.
SchömigNMetzB. Three levels of situation awareness in driving with secondary tasks. Safety Science2013; 56: 44–51.
59.
Rivera-RodriguezAKarshB-T. Interruptions and distractions in healthcare: review and reappraisal. BMJ Quality & Safety2010; 19: 304–312.
60.
TsengL-PLiuY-C.Effects of noises and music on nurses’ mental workload and situation awareness in the operating room. International conference on applied human factors and ergonomics; 25–26 July; Orlando, Florida: Springer, Cham; 2018. p. 450–454.
61.
ZhangMKangJJiaoF. A social survey on the noise impact in open-plan working environments in China. Science of the Total Environment2012; 438: 517–526.
62.
KeränenJHongistoV. Prediction of the spatial decay of speech in open-plan offices. Applied Acoustics2013; 74: 1315–1325.
63.
GreenBParryDOeppenRS, et al.Situational awareness – what it means for clinicians, its recognition and importance in patient safety. Oral Diseases2017; 23: 721–725.
64.
ZhuLXiongK. Identification of key factors influencing unsafe behavior of decoration workers. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics2024; 30(3): 936–945.
65.
MahdiniaMMohammadfamIMirzaei AliabadiM, et al.The mediating effect of workers’ situation awareness on the relationship between work-related factors and human error: a path analysis approach. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics2022; 28: 1958–1966.
66.
SoltanzadehASadeghi YarandiMMirzaei AliabadiM,et al.Modeling cause-and-effect relationships among predictive variables of human error based on the fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making method. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science2022; 23: 259–276.
