JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Research Trends of International Guides for Human Error Prevention in Nuclear Power Plants
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Research Trends of International Guides for Human Error Prevention in Nuclear Power Plants
Lim, Hyeon-Kyo; Kim, Hyunjung; Jang, Tong-Il; Lee, Yong Hee;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to comprehend major concepts and flows that penetrate international guides or standards for developing a quantitative possibility measure of human errors that can be committed or omitted in nuclear power plants. Background: For a few past decades, lots of researchers have studied the effect of stress and/or fatigue which can result in human errors. Thus, this study was carried out on the assumption that much of them were summarized as an international guidelines or manuals, if any, for human error prevention. Method: A literal survey was conducted with materials and documentation published by international organizations related with safety and standardization, such as ISO, OSHA, NIOSH, NASA, and so on with special reference to human error prevention through management of work stress and fatigue as major Performance Shaping Factors. Results: International guides or management manuals on stress or fatigue management for human error prevention hardly were found, and most researches seemed to concentrate on one of them individually. Conclusion: There was few vestige of research that studied both concurrently. However, it was verified that not a few researches have been tried to develop quantitative measures to estimate probability or job characteristics for human error prevention and/or performance downgrading. Application: The results of this study would help to develop a causal model of human errors due to work stress and fatigue that can result in unexpected accidents in nuclear power plant.
 Keywords
Human errors;Accident prevention;Work performance;Stress;Fatigue;Human error possibility index;
 Language
Korean
 Cited by
1.
산업안전규제 순응 스트레스, 인적오류, 직무만족도간의 연관성 분석,박용훈;백종배;

한국안전학회지, 2014. vol.29. 3, pp.91-97 crossref(new window)
1.
Correlation Analysis of Stress to Industrial Safety Regulatory Compliance, Human Error and Job Satisfaction, Journal of the Korean Society of Safety, 2014, 29, 3, 91  crossref(new windwow)
 References
1.
Arkin, W.M. and Handler, J., Naval accidents 1945-1988, Neptune papers, 3, Washington, DC, Institute for Policy Studies, 1989.

2.
Bandura, A., Self-efficacy: The Exercise of Control, New York, NY, Freeman and Company, 1997.

3.
Beare, A.N., Dorris, R.E., Bovell, C.R., Crowe, D.S. and Kozinsky, E.J., A simulator-based study of human errors in nuclear power plant control room tasks, Report NUREG-3309, Albuquerque, NM, Sandia National Laboratories, 1984.

4.
Bell, L.G. and O'Reilly, P.D., Operating experience feedback report - Progress in scram reduction, Report NUREG-275, 5, Washington, DC, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1989.

5.
Bento, J.P., Collection, analysis and classification of human performance problems at the Swedish nuclear power plants, In International Atomic Energy Agency (Ed), Human error classification and data collection: Report of a technical committee meeting, Vienna, IAEA, 83-94, 1990.

6.
Burke, K.A., Szalma, J.L., Duley, A., Oron-Gilad, T. and Hancock, P.A., "Testing the Efficiency and Effectiveness of Soldier Performance under Increasing Task Demand", Proceedings of the 49 Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 49(pp.2119-2123), Orlando, FL, 2005.

7.
Bultmann, U., Kant, I.J., van Amelsvoort, L.G., van den Brandt, P.A. and Kasl, S.V., Differences in fatigue and psychological distress across occupations: results from the Maastricht Cohort Study of Fatigue at Work, Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 43(11), 976-983, 2001. crossref(new window)

8.
Cannon-Bowers, J.A. and Salas, E., Making Decisions under Stress: Implications for Individual and Team Training, 1st ed., APA Books, 1998.

9.
Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, Building the business case for managing stress in the workplace, UK, 2008.

10.
Cohen, S. and Wills, T.A., Stress Social Support, and the Buffering Hypothesis, Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310-357, 1985. crossref(new window)

11.
Comer, M.K., Seabver, D.A., Stillwell, W.G. and Gaddy, C.D., Generating human reliability estimates using expert judgment, Report NUREG/ CR-3688, Washington, DC, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1984.

12.
Cooper, C.L. and Marshall, J., Occupational sources of stress: a review of the literature relating to coronary heart disease and mental ill health, Journal of Occupational Psychology, 49, 11-28, 1976. crossref(new window)

13.
Dennig, R.L. and O'Reilly, P.D., Operating experience feedback report - New plants, Report NUREG-1275, 1, Washington, DC, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1987.

14.
Dhillon, B.S., Human reliability with human factors, 1st ed., New York: Pergamon Press, 1986.

15.
Driskell, J.E. and Salas, E., Overcoming the Effects of Stress on Military Performance: Human Factors, Training and Selection Strategies, In R. Gal, A.D. Mangelsdorff (Eds), Handbook of Military Psychology, Wiley, London, England, 183-193, 1991.

16.
Driskell, J.E., Salas, E. and Johnston, J.H., Does Stress Lead to a Loss of Team Perspective?, Group Dynamics, 3(4), 291-302, 1999. crossref(new window)

17.
Energy Institute, Improving Alertness through Effective Fatigue Management, London, Energy Institute, 2006.

18.
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, OSH in figures : stress at work-facts and figures, Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, 2009.

19.
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, OSH in figures: stress at work-facts and figures, European Communities, Luxembourg, Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, 2009.

20.
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, Prevention of Psychosocial Risks and Stress at Work in Practice, Office for Official Publication of the European Communities 2002.

21.
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, Prevention of Psychosocial Risks and Stress at Work in Practice, Spain, Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, 2002.

22.
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, Research on Work-related Stress, Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, 2000.

23.
European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, Work-related Stress, Belgium, Office for Official Publication of the European Communities, 2000.

24.
Fleishman, E.A., On the relation between abilities, learning, and human performance, American Psychologist, 27, 1017-1032, 1972. crossref(new window)

25.
Fleishman, E.A., Systems for describing human tasks, American Psychologist, 37, 821-834, 1982. crossref(new window)

26.
Fleishman, E.A., Toward a taxonomy of human performance, American Psychologist, 30, 1127-1149, 1975b. crossref(new window)

27.
Fleishman, E.A., Fleishman Job Analysis Survey (F-JAS), Bethesda, MD: Management Research Institute, 1992.

28.
Fleishman, E.A. and Mumford, M.D, Evaluating classifications of job behavior: A construct validation of the Ability Requirement Scales, Personnel Psychology, 44, 523-575, 1991.

29.
Fleishman, E.A. and Mumford, M.D, Ability requirement rating scales, In S. Gael (Ed), Handbook of job analysis, Wiley, New York, 1988.

30.
Fleishman, E.A. and Mumford, M.D, Individual attributes and training performance, In I.L. Goldstein (Ed), Training and development in organizations, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, 183-255, 1989.

31.
Fleishman, E.A. and Quaintance, M.K., Taxonomies of human performance: The description of human tasks, Bethesda, MD: Management Research Institute, 1984.

32.
Fleishman, E.A. and Reilly, M.E., Fleishman Job Analysis Survey (FJAS) administrator's guide, Bethesda, MD: Management Research Institute, 1992a.

33.
Fleishman, E.A. and Reilly, M.E., Handbook of human abilities: Definitions, measurements, and job task requirements, Bethesda, MD: Management Research Institute, 1992b.

34.
Fleishman, E.A., Taxonomic issues in human performance research, In W.T. Singleton, P. Spurgeon (Eds), Measurement of human resources, Halsted Press, New York, 1975a.

35.
Gist, M.E., Self-efficacy: Implications for Organizational Behavior and Human Resource Management, Academy of Management Review, 12, 472-485, 1987.

36.
Gore, S., Perspectives on Social Support and Research on Stress Moderating Processes, In J.M. Ivancevich, D.C. Ganster (Eds), Job Stress: from Theory to Suggestion, Haworth Press, New York, 85-101, 1987.

37.
Hackman, J.R. and Morris, C.G., Group Tasks, Group Interaction Process, and Group Performance Effectiveness: A Review and Proposed Integration in Advances, In L. Berkowitz, (Ed), Experimental Social Psychology, Academic Press, New York, 47-49, 1975.

38.
Haga S., Theory and Measurement of Mental Workload, The Japanese Publishing Service, 2001 (in Japanese).

39.
Haratani T., Nakata A., Otsuka, Y., Miki, K., Fukuda, H. and Izawa, S., Research on Stress Prevention in the Workplace for Reducing Accidents and Injuries, Report JNIOSH-SRR-No.40, Japan, Japanese National Institute of Safety and Health, 2010 (in Japanese).

40.
Health and Safe Executive (HSE), Investigation of the links between psychological ill-health, stress and safety, Report RR488, UK, Health and Safe Executive, 2006.

41.
Health and Safe Executive (HSE), Managing Shiftwork: Health and safety guidance, Report HSG256, UK, Health and Safe Executive, 2006.

42.
Health and Safe Executive (HSE), Managing the causes of work-related stress, Report HSG218, UK, Health and Safe Executive, 2007.

43.
Health and Safe Executive (HSE), The Scale of Occupational Stress: A further analysis of the impact of demographic factors and type of job, Report CRR311/2000, UK, Health and Safe Executive, 2000.

44.
Health and Safe Executive (HSE), The scale of Occupational Stress: The Bristol Stress and Health at Work Study, Report CRR265/2000, UK, Health and Safe Executive, 2000.

45.
Heinrich, H.W., Industrial Accident Prevention, McGraw-Hill, 1931.

46.
Hermann, C.F., Some Consequences of Crisis which Limit the Viability of Organizations, Administrative Science Quarterly, 8, 61-62, 1963. crossref(new window)

47.
Hirokawa, R.Y. and Johnston, D.D., Toward a General Theory of Group Decision Making: Development of an Integrated Model, Small Group Behavior, 20(4), 500-523, 1989. crossref(new window)

48.
Hurrell, J.J. Jr. et al., Measuring job stressors and strains: where we have been, where we are, and where we need to go, Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 3(4), 368-389, 1998. crossref(new window)

49.
Hurrell, J.J. Jr. and McLaney, M.A., Exposure to job stress - a new psychometric instrument, Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 14(1), 27-28, 1988. crossref(new window)

50.
Ilgen, D.R., Major, D.A., Hollenbeck, J.R. and Sego, D.J., Raising an Individual Decisionmaking Model to the Team Level: A New Research Model and Paradigm, In R. Guzzo and E. Salas (Eds), Team decision making in organizations, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA, 113-148, 1995.

51.
International Labour Office (ILO), Stress prevention at work checkpoints - Practical improvements for stress prevention in the workplace, Geneva, 2012.

52.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Ergonomic principles related to mental workload: Part 1 General terms and definitions, ISO 10075-1:2000, 2000.

53.
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), Ergonomic principles related to mental workload - Part 3: Principles and requirements concerning methods for measuring and assessing mental workload, ISO 10075-3:2004, 2004.

54.
Jex, S.M. and Bliese, P.D., Efficacy Beliefs as a Moderator of the Impact of Work-Related Stressors: A Multilevel Study, Journal of Applied Psychology, 84, 349-361, 1999. crossref(new window)

55.
Jex, S.M. and Thomas, J.L., Relations between Stressors and Group Perceptions: Main and Mediating Effects, Work and Stress, 17, 158 -169, 2003. crossref(new window)

56.
Johnston, J.H., Driskell, J.E. and Salas, E., Vigilant and Hypervigilant Decision Making, Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 614-622, 1997. crossref(new window)

57.
Jones, D.M., Noise, In R. Hockey (Ed), Stress and Fatigue in Human Performance, John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, 1983.

58.
Jung, K., Cho, J. and Byun, S., An Empirical study on Evaluation of Performance Shaping Factors and their influence on Human Error, Journal of the Ergonomic Society of Korea, 10, 72-77, 2010.

59.
Karau, S.J. and Kelly, J.R., The Effects of Time Scarcity and Time Abundance on Group Performance Quality and Interaction Process, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 542-571, 1992. crossref(new window)

60.
Kinicki, A.J. and Latack, J.C., Explication of the Construct of Coping with Involuntary Job Loss, Journal of Vocational Behavior, 36, 339-360, 1990. crossref(new window)

61.
Klein, G., Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions, MIT Press, 1998.

62.
Kontogiannis, T., Stress and Operator Decision Making in Coping with Emergencies, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 45, 75-104, 1996. crossref(new window)

63.
Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (KOSHA), Work Environment Improvement for Preventing Musculoskeletal Disorders, Report H-66-2012, Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency, 2012 (in Korean).

64.
Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (KOSHA), Safety Guide for Prenventing Human Errors in Maintenance Works, Report G-16-2011, Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency, 2011 (in Korean).

65.
Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (KOSHA), Medical Treatment Guide for Preventing Musculoskeletal Disorders in Workplaces, Report H-68-2012, Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency, 2012 (in Korean).

66.
Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (KOSHA), Safety Guide for Human Errors and Behaviors, Report G-22-2011, Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency, 2011 (in Korean).

67.
Lam, P. and Leeds, E., Operating experience feedback report-Service water system failures and degradations, Report NUREG-1275, 3, Washington, DC, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1988.

68.
Lazarus, R.S. and Folkman, S., Stress, Coping, and Adaptation, Springer Publishing, 1984.

69.
Meshkati, N., Toward Development of A Cohesive Model of Workload, In P.A. Hancock, and N. Meshkati (Eds), Human Mental Workload, Elsevier Science Publishers, 1988.

70.
Misumi, J., Wilpert B. and Miller, R., Nuclear Safety: A Human Factors Perspective, 1st ed., CRC Press, 2005.

71.
Moray, N.P. and Huey, B.M., Human Factors Research and Nuclear Safety, National Academy Press, 1988.

72.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Stress, Cognition, and Human Performance: A Literature Review and Conceptual Framework, Report NASA/TM-2004-212824, Washington, DC, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2004.

73.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Principles and Guidelines for Duty and Rest Scheduling for Commercial Aviation, Report NASA/TM-110404, Washington, DC, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1996.

74.
O'Reilly, P.D. and Plumlee, G.L., Operating experience feedback report- Technical specifications, Report NUREG-1275, 4, Washington, DC, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1988.

75.
Orasanu, J. and Salas, E., Team Decision-Making in Complex Environments, In G. Klein, J. Orasanu, R. Calderwood and C.E. Zsambok (Eds), Decision making in Action: Models and Method, Ablex, Norwood, NJ, 327-345, 1993.

76.
Research Group on Occupational Fatigue, Handbook of Occupational Fatigue, Japan Society for Occupational Health, 1988 (in Japanese).

77.
Samman, S.M. and Salas, E., Stress Exposed: The Unfolding Story, Stress News, 14, 7-11, 2002.

78.
Schaubroeck, J., Lam, S.S.K. and Xie, J.L., Collective Efficacy versus Self-Efficacy in Coping Responses to Stressors and Control: A Cross Cultural Study, Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 512-525, 2000. crossref(new window)

79.
Shaw, M.E. and Penrod, W.T., Group Effectiveness as a Function of Amount of 'legitimate' Information, Journal of Social Psychology, 62, 241-246, 1964. crossref(new window)

80.
Skof, M., Human characteristics affecting nuclear safety, In the International Atomic Energy Agency (Ed), Human error classification and data collection: Report of a technical committee meeting, IAEA, Vienna, 95-102, 1990.

81.
Stewart, M. and Melchers, R.E., Probabilistic Risk Assessment of Engineering Systems, Springer, 1997.

82.
Stillwell, W.G., Seaver, D.A. and Schwartz, J.P., Expert estimation of human error probabilities in nuclear power plant operations: A review of probability assessment and scaling, Report NUREG/ CR-2255, Washington, DC, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1982.

83.
The Royal Aeronautical Society, Fatigue and Duty Time Limitations - An International Review, 1997.

84.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC), Fitness Duty Programs, Report 10CFR Part26, US, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2008.

85.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC), Fatigue Management for Nuclear Power Plant Personnel, Regulatory Guide 5.73, US, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2009.

86.
Wickens, C., Gordon, S. and Liu, Y., An Introduction to Human Factors Engineering, 1st ed., Longman, 1999.

87.
Wu, T., Hwang, S., Maintenance error reduction strategies in nuclear power plants, using root cause analysis, Applied Ergonomics, 20, 115-121, 1989. crossref(new window)

88.
Zech, L.W.J.R., Informal Discussion of Current Issues, In E.W. Hagen (Ed), Conference record for 1988 Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers 4th conference on human factors and nuclear power plants, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, New York, 40-42, 1988.