Testing the reliability of accident analysis methods: a comparison of AcciMap, STAMP-CAST and AcciNet

20Citations
Citations of this article
47Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Accident analysis methods are used to model the multifactorial cause of adverse incidents. Methods such as AcciMap, STAMP-CAST and recently AcciNet, are systemic approaches that support the identification of safety interventions across sociotechnical system levels. Despite their growing popularity, little is known about how reliable systems-based methods are when used to describe, model and classify contributory factors and relationships. Here, we conducted an intra-rater and inter-rater reliability assessment of AcciMap, STAMP-CAST and AcciNet using the Signal Detection Theory (SDT) paradigm. A total of 180 hours’ worth of analyses across 360 comparisons were performed by 30 expert analysts. Findings revealed that all three methods produced a weak to moderate positive correlation coefficient, however the inter-rater reliability of STAMP-CAST was significantly higher compared to AcciMap and AcciNet. No statistically significant or practically meaningful differences were found between methods in the overall intra-rater reliability analyses. Implications and future research directions are discussed.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hulme, A., Stanton, N. A., Walker, G. H., Waterson, P., & Salmon, P. M. (2024). Testing the reliability of accident analysis methods: a comparison of AcciMap, STAMP-CAST and AcciNet. Ergonomics, 67(5), 695–715. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2023.2240048

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free