KSCE Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering Research (대한토목학회논문집)

Korean Society of Civil Engeneers (대한토목학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Designing Questionnaires for Better Reliable Survey: Case Study of Using Railway Safety Culture Survey Data

신뢰성 향상을 위한 설문문항 설계: 철도안전문화 설문자료 사례를 중심으로

  • Received : 2014.06.25
  • Accepted : 2014.10.14
  • Published : 2014.12.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The study of safety culture estimate has received a wide attentions in many other industries, rather in the contexture of railroad stands at an initial phase. A factor analysis and internal reliability test were conducted to check if the survey results are reliable by looking at how the factors are dimensioned and how the questionnaires are sub-grouped in accordance with such factors, and further if there are any other common attributes being extracted as a new factor. The designed 5 factors were expanded to 7 through the test, and they were renamed accordingly. The questionnaires are reorganized according to the new 7 factors. It implicates that thorough investigation of the common attributes is important in reducing the gaps between interviewers' and interviewees' understanding. Moreover, the results of internal reliability test represent the new design of questionnaire is reasonably acceptable with the high reliable values. We expect such approaches can be applied for the railway culture survey study to be more reliable and applicable.

철도외의 다른 산업분야에서 안전문화 측정에 대한 연구가 활발히 진행된 것과 달리, 국내 철도분야의 안전문화 성숙에 대한 연구는 아주 초보적인 단계에 머물러 있다. 본 연구는 철도안전문화 평가의 신뢰성을 높이기 위해 설문문항 구성 시 어떻게 평가요인을 구성하고, 설문문항 그룹이 해당 요인을 얼마나 잘 대변하고 있는지, 그리고 그룹을 정의한 기준이 다른 공통 속성을 갖는지 여부를 분석하기 위해 내적 신뢰도 및 요인 분석을 실시하였다. 요인분석 결과 기존 5개에서 7개 요소로 도출되었고, 그에 따른 설문문항의 그룹화 및 요소의 이름이 재부여 되었다. 이는 문항간에 내제된 공통 속성을 잘 파악하는 것이 설문자와 피 설문자 간의 견해 차이를 줄이는 데 중요함을 의미한다. 또한 새로운 요인 분류에 대한 문항들의 내부 신뢰도 확인결과 여전히 이전과 비교하였을 때 높게 관측되어 그 분류가 적절함을 확인하였다. 본 연구는 철도안전문화 평가의 신뢰성을 높이는데 통계적인 방법을 활용하여 기존 설문조사 결과를 검증하고 어떻게 접근해야 하는지 다루고 있어 관련분야에서 많이 활용될 것으로 기대된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Cattell, R. B. (1966). "The scree test for the number of factors." Multivariate Behavioral Research, Vol. 1, pp. 245-276. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327906mbr0102_10
  2. Filho, A., Andrade, J. and Marinho, M. (2010). "A safety culture maturity model for petrochemical companies in Brazil." Safety Science, Vol. 48, pp. 615-624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2010.01.012
  3. Fleming, M. (2000) Safety culture maturity model, Offshore Technology Report 2000/049.
  4. Foster, P. and Hoult, S. (2013). "The safety journey: Using a Safety Maturity Model for Safety Planning and Assurance in the UK Coal Mining Industry." Minerals, Vol. 3, pp. 59-72. https://doi.org/10.3390/min3010059
  5. Frazier, C., Ludwig, T., Whitaker, B. and Roberts, S. (2013). "A hierachical factor analysis of a safety culture survey." Jurnal of safety research, Vol. 45, pp. 15-28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsr.2012.10.015
  6. Gordon, R., Kirwan, B. and Perrin, E. (2007). "Measuring safety culture in a research & development centre: A Comparison of Two Methods in the Air Traffic Management Domain." Safety Science, Vol. 45, pp. 669-695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2007.04.004
  7. Hair, J. F., Tatham, R. L., Anderson, R. E. and Black, W. (1998). Multivariate data analysis. (Fifth Ed.) Prentice Hall, London.
  8. HE (Human Engineering). for the Health and Safety Executive, (2005) Development and validation of the HMRI safety culture inspection toolkit, Research Report 365.
  9. Horn, J. L. (1965). "A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis." Psychometrika, Vol. 30, pp. 179-185. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02289447
  10. Hudson, P. (2003). "Applying the lessons of high risk industries to health care." Qual Saf Health Care, Vol. 12, pp. i7-i12. https://doi.org/10.1136/qhc.12.suppl_1.i7
  11. IAEA (2002). Safety culture in nuclear installations: Guidance for Use in the Enhancement of Safety Culture, IAEA-TECDOC-1329.
  12. Kaiser, H. F. (1960). "The application of electronic computers to factor analysis." Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 20, pp. 141-151. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000116
  13. Korea Transportation Safety Authority (TS) (2011). Development of the safety culture inspection standards and process, Technical Report (in Korean).
  14. Korea Transportation Safety Authority (TS) (2012). Development of the safety culture inspection standards and process, Technical Report (in Korean).
  15. Lammers, W. J. and Badia, P. (2005). Fundamental of behavioral research, California: Thomson and Wadsworth.
  16. Lardner, R. (2002). Towards a mature safety culture, Presented at the Institute of Chemical Engineers Annual Conference, Manchester, UK.
  17. Ledesma, R. D. and Valero-Mora, P. (2007). "Determining the number of factors to retain in EFA: An Easy-to-Use Computer Program for Carrying out Parallel Analysis." Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 1-11.
  18. Lim, K. K, Yeum, D. and Kim, S. (2014). "The development of a railway safety maturty model and estimate procedures." Journal of the Korean Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 34, No. 1, pp. 195-202 (in Korean). https://doi.org/10.12652/Ksce.2014.34.1.0195
  19. ORR (Office of Rail Regulation). (2011). Railway management maturity model (RM3).
  20. Tabachnik, B. and Fidell, L. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.), Needham Heights, MA: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
  21. Velicer, W. F. (1976). "Determining the number of components from the matrix of partial correlations." Psychometrika, Vol. 41, pp. 321-327. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02293557
  22. Zwick, W. R. and Velicer, W. F. (1986). "Comparison of five rules for determining the number of components to retain." Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 99, pp. 432-442. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.99.3.432