Technical note: measurement issues in taxonomic reliability

Ross, Alastair; Wallace, Brendan; Davies, John B.

doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2003.10.004

Cited by 32 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The "index of concordance" described in Ross et al [37] was used to analyze the data set. Results were tabulated for comparison of agreement between participants in each group at the category level and then again at the higher taxonomy level (which comprised four codes-unsafe acts, preconditions to unsafe acts, unsafe Table 2 shows the percentage agreement for each category when the category was chosen at least once for a finding.…”

Section: Methods Of Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Ross et al [5] drew attention to the fact that reliability studies of taxonomies can be overlooked, use inappropriate methods, and be reported ambiguously. These faults are indeed prevalent in the relatively few reliability studies conducted on incident classification systems.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Martin and Bateson [22] and Ross et al [5] state that the correct method for calculating intercoder consensus is to calculate the index of concordance by applying the formula A/(A + D), where A is the total number of agreements and D is the total number of disagreements.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

[Retracted] Coding ATC Incident Data Using HFACS: Intercoder Consensus

Wang

Yang

et al. 2011

Journal of Quality and Reliability Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reliability studies for coding contributing factors of incident reports in high hazard industries are rarely conducted and reported. Although the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) appears to have a larger number of such studies completed than most other systems doubt exists as the accuracy and comparability of results between studies due to aspects of methodology and reporting. This paper reports on a trial conducted on HFACS to determine its reliability in the context of military air traffic control (ATC). Two groups participated in the trial: one group comprised of specialists in the field of human factors, and the other group comprised air traffic controllers. All participants were given standardized training via a self-paced workbook and then read 14 incident reports and coded the associated findings. The results show similarly low consensus for both groups of participants. Several reasons for the results are proposed associated with the HFACS model, the context within which incident reporting occurs in real organizations and the conduct of the studies.

show abstract

Section: Methods Of Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

[Retracted] Coding ATC Incident Data Using HFACS: Intercoder Consensus

Wang

Yang

et al. 2011

Journal of Quality and Reliability Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Reliability is an essential attribute of all standard and systematic coding systems (Kirwan, 1996;Ross et al, 2004;Stanton and Stevenage, 1998). It is essential that the coding system produces consistent coding of the data regardless of when or by whom the coding is conducted.…”

Section: Incident Coding Systems and Their Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development of safety incident coding systems through improving coding reliability

Olsen

Williamson

2015

Applied Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Analyzing combinations of individual protection, management protection, structural calculations, and system damage, and their effects on safety culture can provide opportunities to enhance safety at sea. In previous studies, many qualitative models have been used to analyze the risks of accidents or incidents, such as Bayesian models of plan recognition (Charniak, 1992), taxonomy reliability (Ross et al, 2003), and risk-based approaches in CREAM (Marseguerra et al, 2007). PINSafe is a method to qualitatively recognize patterns in human performance by processing error taxonomy information from analysis of unsafe actions within a scenario or root cause.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Pinsafe In Analysis Scenariomentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategic Identification of Unsafe Actions That Characterize Accidents on Ships

Rivai¹,

Furusho²

2013

Journal of Navigation and Port Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

: Seafarers are one of the main engines driving economic growth in the maritime sector. The International Maritime (IMO) Organization estimated that there were approximately 1. 5 million seafarers around the world engaged in international trade in 2012. Data have shown that human casualties in maritime accidents around Japan have shown an increasing trend over the last ten years. One cause is human error, which is inseparable from the human element that influences mariner's decisions and actions. The Personal Identification (PIN) Safe method is one way to systematically identify substandard and unsafe actions by considering the error taxonomies associated with various scenarios for a maritime system. The results are based on analysis of the role of the human element in commonly reported unsafe actions when interacting with equipment and other systems. Furthermore, patterns of influencing shaping factors were observed on the basis of data processing; the aim of this study was to promote safety culture and provide an opportunity to improve safety at sea.

show abstract

Technical note: measurement issues in taxonomic reliability

Cited by 32 publications

References 23 publications

[Retracted] Coding ATC Incident Data Using HFACS: Intercoder Consensus

[Retracted] Coding ATC Incident Data Using HFACS: Intercoder Consensus

Development of safety incident coding systems through improving coding reliability

Strategic Identification of Unsafe Actions That Characterize Accidents on Ships

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About