liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
What you find is not always what you fix-How other aspects than causes of accidents decide recommendations for remedial actions
Linköping University, Department of Science and Technology, Digital Media. Linköping University, The Institute of Technology.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-8862-7331
Linköping University, Department of Computer and Information Science. Linköping University, The Institute of Technology.
2010 (English)In: Accident Analysis and Prevention, ISSN 0001-4575, E-ISSN 1879-2057, Vol. 42, no 6, 2132-2139 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

In accident investigation, the ideal is often to follow the principle "what-you-find-is-what-you-fix", an ideal reflecting that the investigation should be a rational process of first identifying causes, and then implement remedial actions to fix them. Previous research has however identified cognitive and political biases leading away from this ideal. Somewhat surprisingly, however, the same factors that often are highlighted in modern accident models are not perceived in a recursive manner to reflect how they influence the process of accident investigation in itself. Those factors are more extensive than the cognitive and political biases that are often highlighted in theory. Our purpose in this study was to reveal constraints affecting accident investigation practices that lead the investigation towards or away from the ideal of "what-you-find-is-what-you-fix". We conducted a qualitative interview study with 22 accident investigators from different domains in Sweden. We found a wide range of factors that led investigations away from the ideal, most which more resembled factors involved in organizational accidents, rather than reflecting flawed thinking. One particular limitation of investigation was that many investigations stop the analysis at the level of "preventable causes", the level where remedies that were currently practical to implement could be found. This could potentially limit the usefulness of using investigations to get a view on the "big picture" of causes of accidents as a basis for further remedial actions.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2010. Vol. 42, no 6, 2132-2139 p.
Keyword [en]
Accident investigation, Bias, Stop-rule, Method, Experience feedback, Remedial actions
National Category
Engineering and Technology
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-58810DOI: 10.1016/j.aap.2010.07.003OAI: diva2:346268
Available from: 2010-08-31 Created: 2010-08-27 Last updated: 2013-09-13

Open Access in DiVA

fulltext(524 kB)764 downloads
File information
File name FULLTEXT01.pdfFile size 524 kBChecksum SHA-512
Type fulltextMimetype application/pdf

Other links

Publisher's full text

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Lundberg, JonasHollnagel, Erik
By organisation
Digital MediaThe Institute of TechnologyDepartment of Computer and Information Science
In the same journal
Accident Analysis and Prevention
Engineering and Technology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
Total: 764 downloads
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 308 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link