PSYCOLOGY
This work is copyright and has been published by the Safety Institute of Australia Ltd (SIA) under the
auspices of HaSPA (Health and Safety Professionals Alliance). Except as may be expressly provided by law
and subject to the conditions prescribed in the Copyright Act 1968 (Commonwealth of Australia), or as
expressly permitted below, no part of the work may in any form or by any means (electronic, mechanical,
microcopying, digital scanning, photocopying, recording or otherwise) be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system or transmitted without prior written permission of the SIA.
You are free to reproduce the material for reasonable personal, or in-house, non-commercial use for the
purposes of workplace health and safety as long as you attribute the work using the citation guidelines below
and do not charge fees directly or indirectly for use of the material. You must not change any part of the work
or remove any part of this copyright notice, licence terms and disclaimer below.
A further licence will be required and may be granted by the SIA for use of the materials if you wish to:
· reproduce multiple copies of the work or any part of it
· charge others directly or indirectly for access to the materials
· include all or part of the materials in advertising of a product or services, or in a product for sale
· modify the materials in any form, or
· publish the materials.
Enquiries regarding the licence or further use of the works are welcome and should be addressed to:
Registrar, Australian OHS Education Accreditation Board
Safety Institute of Australia Ltd, PO Box 2078, Gladstone Park, Victoria, Australia, 3043
registrar@ohseducationaccreditation.org.au
Citation of the whole Body of Knowledge should be as:
HaSPA (Health and Safety Professionals Alliance).(2012). The Core Body of Knowledge for
Generalist OHS Professionals. Tullamarine, VIC. Safety Institute of Australia.
Citation of individual chapters should be as, for example:
Pryor, P., Capra, M. (2012). Foundation Science. In HaSPA (Health and Safety Professionals
Alliance), The Core Body of Knowledge for Generalist OHS Professionals. Tullamarine, VIC.
Safety Institute of Australia.
Disclaimer
This material is supplied on the terms and understanding that HaSPA, the Safety Institute of
Australia Ltd and their respective employees, officers and agents, the editor, or chapter authors and
peer reviewers shall not be responsible or liable for any loss, damage, personal injury or death
suffered by any person, howsoever caused and whether or not due to negligence, arising from the
use of or reliance of any information, data or advice provided or referred to in this publication.
Before relying on the material, users should carefully make their own assessment as to its accuracy,
currency, completeness and relevance for their purposes, and should obtain any appropriate
professional advice relevant to their particular circumstances.
Synopsis of the OHS Body of Knowledge
Background
A defined body of knowledge is required as a basis for professional certification and for
accreditation of education programs giving entry to a profession. The lack of such a body
of knowledge for OHS professionals was identified in reviews of OHS legislation and
OHS education in Australia. After a 2009 scoping study, WorkSafe Victoria provided
funding to support a national project to develop and implement a core body of knowledge
for generalist OHS professionals in Australia.
Development
The process of developing and structuring the main content of this document was managed
by a Technical Panel with representation from Victorian universities that teach OHS and
from the Safety Institute of Australia, which is the main professional body for generalist
OHS professionals in Australia. The Panel developed an initial conceptual framework
which was then amended in accord with feedback received from OHS tertiary-level
educators throughout Australia and the wider OHS profession. Specialist authors were
invited to contribute chapters, which were then subjected to peer review and editing. It is
anticipated that the resultant OHS Body of Knowledge will in future be regularly amended
and updated as people use it and as the evidence base expands.
Conceptual structure
The OHS Body of Knowledge takes a ‘conceptual’ approach. As concepts are abstract, the
OHS professional needs to organise the concepts into a framework in order to solve a
problem. The overall framework used to structure the OHS Body of Knowledge is that:
Work impacts on the safety and health of humans who work in organisations. Organisations are
influenced by the socio-political context. Organisations may be considered a system which may
contain hazards which must be under control to minimise risk. This can be achieved by
understanding models causation for safety and for health which will result in improvement in the
safety and health of people at work. The OHS professional applies professional practice to
influence the organisation to being about this improvement.
Audience
The OHS Body of Knowledge provides a basis for accreditation of OHS professional
education programs and certification of individual OHS professionals. It provides guidance
for OHS educators in course development, and for OHS professionals and professional
bodies in developing continuing professional development activities. Also, OHS
regulators, employers and recruiters may find it useful for benchmarking OHS professional
practice.
Application
Importantly, the OHS Body of Knowledge is neither a textbook nor a curriculum; rather it
describes the key concepts, core theories and related evidence that should be shared by
Australian generalist OHS professionals. This knowledge will be gained through a
combination of education and experience.
Accessing and using the OHS Body of Knowledge for generalist OHS professionals
The OHS Body of Knowledge is published electronically. Each chapter can be downloaded
separately. However users are advised to read the Introduction, which provides background
to the information in individual chapters. They should also note the copyright requirements
and the disclaimer before using or acting on the information.
The Human: Basic Psychological Principles
Carlo is an academic at the University of New South Wales, and holds a bachelors
degree and PhD in Psychology. He specialises in psychological hazards at work, and
teaches in the area of workplace safety and risk management. His research comprises
human factors issues (fatigue, stress, bullying); risk perception, communication and
behaviour; and error classification. Carlo has provided expert opinions and
consultancy advice to several industries on safety-related projects, and is involved in
training, independent workplace investigations, and organisational development.
Work always involves humans. Humans are complex beings and their behaviour and their
health is the result of interaction within and between their internal biological,
psychological and social systems and their physical and social environment. This chapter
outlines elements of psychology relevant to Occupational Health and Safety (OHS)
professional practice. Although the discipline is influenced by many different schools of
thought, modern psychological practice employs scientific methods. Particularly relevant
to OHS practice, are behavioural psychology (the foundation of behaviour-based safety)
and cognitive psychology (which highlights the cognitive capacities of workers, and errors
that can occur in decision making). Also, this chapter describes the physiological bases of
some psychological phenomena to be considered when improving and protecting the health
and safety of workers, and provides basic information about personality psychology and
mental disorders. Finally, implications for OHS practice are considered using incentive
schemes and behaviour-based safety as examples.
Keywords
behaviour, cognition, personality, attributions, psychological disorders, OHS, work
1 Introduction
This chapter examines basic elements of psychological science that are most relevant for
Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) professionals. It is the second in a series of three1
that examine the human as an individual from biological, psychological and social
perspectives to facilitate understanding of the human response to hazards, work and
relationships, how work-related injury and illness occur, and how to prevent or mitigate
such outcomes.
Psychology is defined as “the scientific study of behaviour and mental processes” (Coon
& Mitterer, 2010). Although it comprises many sub-disciplines and theoretical
perspectives that vary in methods, scope and area of focus, the modern practice of
psychology, in both academic and applied settings, employs scientific rigour in the
examination of human behaviour. After brief consideration of the history of modern
psychology, the chapter presents some basic psychobiology, which demonstrates the link
between foundation science, and human biology and behaviour. It then addresses
elements of behavioural, cognitive and personality psychology, and mental disorders, and
concludes by considering some ways in which knowledge of human behaviour can
inform OHS professional practice.2
1.1 Distinguishing between psychology and psychiatry
Clarification of the difference between psychology and psychiatry is warranted because
people often confuse these professions with one another. The Australian Psychological
Society (APS, 2011a) explains that although psychologists and psychiatrists often work
together in mental health settings, a psychiatrist has a medical degree as well as
specialisation in the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness, while psychologists study
undergraduate (and often postgraduate) psychology.
Psychiatrists treat the effects of emotional disturbances on the body and the effects of physical
conditions on the mind…Psychologists assist people with everyday problems such as stress and
relationship difficulties, and some specialise in treating people with a mental illness. They help
people to develop the skills needed to function better and to prevent ongoing problems. (APS, 2011a)
Clinical psychologists and counselling psychologists treat clients with mental illnesses or
other emotional problems. As psychologists do not have medical degrees, they cannot
prescribe medications. Not all psychologists focus strictly on the diagnosis and treatment
of mental health conditions; many specialise in other areas of practice (e.g. health
psychology, sports and performance psychology, educational psychology) and work in
various settings (e.g. public health, corrections services, health promotion, academia).
1 Along with OHS BoK The Human: As a Biological System, and OHS BoK The Human: Principles of
Social Interaction
2 Some other psychological issues relevant to OHS are outlined in BoK The Human: As Social Being.
Historical development of modern psychology
Examination of the ways in which people behave, and why they do so, has occurred since
ancient civilisation. Modern psychology has its conceptual roots in philosophy and 19th
century physiology (Cherry, 2010). Its development was influenced by work undertaken
in different parts of the world, representative of different values and perspectives. In 1879
in Leipzig, Wilhelm Wundt set up the first psychology laboratory, where he examined
people’s reaction time to stimuli, studying small mental processes in order to understand
more complex ones. Understanding the structure of the mind via ‘introspection’ was a
goal of Wundt and his contemporaries. Rejecting structuralism, William James, whose
Principles of Psychology (1890) has been hailed as the genesis of modern psychology,
applied introspective methods to determining the function of the mind (Powell, Symbaluk
and Honey, 2009). While functionalism and structuralism were superseded by other
schools of thought, both made significant contributions to the discipline of psychology
(Cherry, 2010; Francher, 2008).
Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) is probably the most well-known figure in the history of
psychology. He was a physician who developed what became known as his
psychoanalytic theory of the unconscious mind. While there are many interesting aspects
to Freudian theory, it was largely discredited by subsequent, more objective
developments in psychology. Although some aspects of Freud’s psychoanalysis – which
involved talking about dreams and other experiences to uncover frustrations between the
unconscious and conscious minds – have survived (Cherry, 2010), modern
psychoanalysis is quite different from Freud’s conception, and is no longer considered the
dominant treatment option (see, for example, Webster, 1996).
In the early 20th century, researchers such as John Watson considered the behaviour of
all organisms, not just humans, and psychological research with animals began (see, for
example, Buckley, 1989). Behaviourism placed observable behaviour at the forefront of
psychological research, and influenced other aspects of psychology such as
psychobiology (or behavioural neuroscience).
Although behaviourism remained
influential, researchers began to infer thoughts, memories and other mental processes
from observable behaviour; this was termed the “cognitive revolution in psychology” of
the 1960s and 1970s (see, for example, Baars, 1986).
Recognition of the benefits to be gained from applying psychology to the workplace can
be traced to the early 1900s. In 1913, Hugo Münster identified a need for organisations
Today, occupational health psychology (OHP) is a growing and evolving field. The
Australian Psychological Society has an Occupational Health Psychology Interest Group
(APS, 2011b) with more than 120 members. According to Leka and Houdmont (2010, p.
8):
OHP [Occupational Health Psychology] can be defined simply as ‘the contribution of applied
psychology to occupational health’. This ‘interface’ definition, adhered to in Europe,
recognizes that occupational health is a multidisciplinary area and that OHP practitioners offer
a focused specialization that they may usefully apply within multidisciplinary teams. The North
American perspective on OHP is in large part consistent with the European approach, but
differs in that it encompasses psychological perspectives alongside those from other
occupational sciences.
3 Psychobiology
Sometimes when a phenomenon is described as ‘psychological’, the origin of such
phenomena is forgotten or misconstrued. In OHS psychological hazards are starting to be
recognised as being similar to ‘physical’ hazards in terms of importance. Though
psychological phenomena are not always tangible, they are physiologically mediated
through the psychobiological interactions between systems in the body, and their
consequent effects on behaviour. Psychobiology is defined as “the study of the biology of
the psyche, including the anatomy, physiology, and pathology of the mind” (Thomas,
1988
The purpose of outlining some basic issues in psychobiology is to
highlight that psychological phenomena have physiological bases, and the potential for
physiological (health) consequences.
Structure and function of the brain3
The brain and spinal cord comprise the central nervous system, while the nerves that link
the brain and spinal cord to muscles and glands comprise the peripheral nervous system.
The peripheral nervous system is divided into the somatic nervous system, which refers to
those nerves that act on skeletal muscles, and the autonomic nervous system, which acts
on visceral muscles and glands. The autonomic system is further subdivided into the
sympathetic nervous system, which mobilises the body for response to threat and the parasympathetic nervous system, which has essentially the opposite effect in
that it helps to calm the body after its emergency response (see, for example, Cherry
Occipital lobe – primarily responsible for receiving and processing visual stimuli
· Parietal lobe – primarily responsible for tactile and sensory processing, such as
touch, pressure and pain; includes the somatosensory area near the central fissure
· Frontal lobe – primarily responsible for reasoning and higher-level cognition;
includes the primary motor area near the central fissure, which receives input
from other areas and coordinates movement
· Temporal lobe – primarily responsible for receiving and processing auditory
stimuli.
The human brain
The left and right hemispheres of the brain are connected by the corpus callosum; the left
hemisphere controls the right side of the body, and the right hemisphere controls the left
side of the body. Speech and language processing are most commonly associated with the
left hemisphere, which includes Broca’s area that is important for speech production, and
Wernicke’s area that is important for language comprehension. Generally, the right
hemisphere is responsible for non-verbal, visuospatial processing. These distinctions
were discovered through ‘split brain’ studies conducted on people who had their corpus
callosum severed as a last-resort treatment for epilepsy, or had suffered strokes or
Some physiological consequences of stress
An important example of psychobiological interactions relevant to OHS is the stress
response, which also indicates how neural and endocrinological systems work together.
The physiological aspects of stress are activation of the hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal
(HPA) axis (Figure 2) and activation of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS). The SNS
releases adrenaline, and is activated in situations where an organism may have to ‘fight or
(take) The heart rate and blood pressure are elevated, blood goes to the brain and
muscles, while bodily functions that are non-essential for a fight or flight response are
inhibited Briefly, the HPA axis is involved in the release of cortisol, a
glucocorticoid, which is essential for energy regulation (among several other functions).
The hypothalamus releases corticotropin releasing factor (CRF), which stimulates the
anterior pituitary to release adrenocoticotropin releasing factor (ACTRF), which in turn
stimulates the release of cortisol from the adrenal medulla on top of the kidneys.
Stress has been shown to have numerous health impacts. Because of its effects on the
HPA axis and the resulting release of glucocorticoids, which can have
immunosuppressive properties, if stress occurs too frequently or too severely it can have
immunosuppressive effects (see, for example, Sapolsky, Romero & Munck, 2000).
Several studies of students during exam periods, and of carers for people with
Alzheimer’s disease or other debilitative disorders, have consistently shown reduced
immunity function as a result of stress (e.g. Kiecolt-Glaser & Glaser, 1994; Glaser, Pearl,
Kiecolt-Glaser & Malarkey, 1994). Stress-induced immune-suppression has gone from an
extremely controversial idea (because scientists once thought that the immune system
was completely autonomous and not linked with the brain) to being generally accepted,
and has resulted in the subdiscipline of psychoneuroimmunology (see, for example, Ader,
Felton & Cohen, 2001).
Stress can influence cardiovascular disease either by effects on lifestyle behaviours
(decreased exercise, poor diet, etc.) or by SNS effects (see, for example, Black &
Garbutt, 2002). Several studies have demonstrated the relationship between high stress
and cardiovascular problems, using magnitude of current stress responses to predict
future cardiovascular problems (such as hypertension and atherosclerosis) (see, for
example, Matthews, Woodall & Allen, 1993), and by examining the relationship between
job stress and coronary heart disease incidence and mortality (see, for example, Theorell
and Karasek, 1996). The Whitehall studies (UCL, 2011) were important in the collection
of prospective data on the links between workplace stress and cardiovascular disease,
while controlling for other risk factors (smoking, poor diet, lack of exercise). Metaanalyses of prospective studies examining the link between stress and cardiovascular
Behavioural psychology
Several aspects of behavioural psychology have direct applications in OHS interventions.
Behavioural psychology is sometimes referred to as ‘the psychology of learning’ or
‘learning and motivation’ (see, for example, Schwartz and Robbins, 1995).
Classical conditioning involves the pairing of a stimulus that produces a response under
any circumstances (e.g. food produces a salivary response) with a neutral stimulus (e.g. a
sound tone) such that, over time, the neutral stimulus elicits the response when presented
alone. This kind of learning is most famously described with reference to Pavlov’s dogs
(see, for example, Schwartz & Robbins, 1995). Classical conditioning can be used with
humans to form associations that control behaviour (e.g. pairing smoking with the
ingestion of a substance that makes one feel sick, so that the cues associated with
smoking make a person feel sick even when the substance is not ingested, and thus less
inclined to smoke).
Operant conditioning concerns how organisms learn about the connection between
situations, behaviours and consequences. In 1898, Edward Thorndike conducted learning
experiments with cats. Hungry cats were placed in a ‘puzzle box’ where they made
various responses (pacing, meowing, etc.) until they found that pressing a lever would
liberate them from the box and allow them access to the food outside. From these
experiments, Thorndike developed his Law of Effect, which states that:
Of several responses made to the same situation, those which are closely accompanied or closely
followed by satisfaction to the animal will, other things being equal, be more firmly connected
with the situation, so that, when it recurs, [the behaviours] will be more likely to recur (Thorndike,
1911, p.244).
In other words, behaviour can be controlled by its consequences. A stimulus leads to a
response, which is reinforced: Stimulus Æ Response Æ Reinforcement. The stimulus for
Thorndike’s cats was the box. The response was the action of pressing the lever and the
reinforcement was the food. B. F. Skinner (1938) applied the term ‘operant conditioning’
to this form of behaviour modification after extending the concept with rats. In the now
iconic ‘Skinner box,’ rats learned to press a lever when a stimulus (e.g. a light or tone)
was present. The lever press resulted in the delivery of food (the reinforcer). Applying
this to behaviour-based safety, the stimulus-response-reinforcer connection parallels the
antecedent–behaviour-consequences (ABC) model that is used to analyse and change
behaviours
Types of reinforcement
Different types of reinforcement4 have different effects on the target behaviour (Table 1).
Types of reinforcement
Type of reinforcer
Response Positive (Appetitive/Nice) Negative (Aversive/Nasty)
Produces the reinforcer Positive reinforcement
(Response increases)
Punishment
(Response decreases)
Eliminates/prevents or
removes the reinforcer
Omission training
(Response decreases)
Negative reinforcement
(Response increases)
It is easy to think of examples of positive reinforcement and punishment, for example:
· A child is well behaved while at the shopping mall and receives a chocolate bar:
positive reinforcement
· A child is not well behaved and gets a ‘time out’ at home: punishment.
Omission training and negative reinforcement are a little more difficult to conceptualise;
for example:
· Someone who is scared of spiders sprays their home with insect spray (whether it
is effective or not); not seeing spiders in the house is negative reinforcement of
that behaviour, because it is connected with the removal of an aversive event.
· When children are fighting in the back seat of the car their father tells them that
every time they fight he will throw a lolly out the window; this is omission
training, because the behaviour results in the removal of a desirable event.
The different types of reinforcement are readily applicable to adults in workplace
situations
The behavioural perspective has been, and still is, incredibly influential in many domains,
including education and health care. However, there are several problems with
behaviourism when taken to its full extent. The deterministic attribution of a person’s
behaviour to their environment raises questions about the influences of mental processes
and the place of personal responsibility in decision making. Nevertheless, the principles
of behavioural psychology relating to how behaviours are learned and reinforced are
Learned helplessness
Another paradigm with roots in behavioural psychology – learned helplessness – is
relevant to stress, control and depression. In 1967, Seligman and colleagues published the
results of experiments which revealed that dogs exposed to inescapable electric shocks
gave up trying to evade the shocks and passively succumbed to them (Mikulincer, 1994).
One group of dogs was exposed to shocks that they were able to control or escape (i.e. by
jumping over a barrier they could turn the shock off), while the other group could not
control or escape the shock (i.e. jumping over the barrier did not stop the shock). Animals
in the latter group later showed a pattern of cognitive, motivational and emotional
deficits, where they simply laid down and passively accepted the shocks, which was
termed ‘helplessness’.
These experiments highlighted the importance of the controllability of a stimulus to
subsequent behaviour, and resulted in a learned helplessness theory of human depression
that proposed that once people perceive helplessness (i.e. they feel they cannot control
particular negative outcomes), they attribute it to a cause that “can be stable or unstable,
global or specific, and internal or external” (Abramson, Seligman & Teasdale, 1978
5 Cognitive psychology
Cognitive psychology developed from the limitations of behaviourism in accounting for
some human behaviours/abilities (e.g. the development of language from such a young
age), and from advances in information technology and computer modeling. Although
some behaviourists, such as Skinner, did not think that unobservable phenomena should
be the focus of the science of psychology, the investigation of how humans process and
store information has become a dominant field in psychological research. It is important
to note that behavioural learning and cognition are linked (e.g. learning involves
memory), and the dominant treatment method for psychological disorders is in fact a
combination of behavioural and cognitive perspectives and techniques.
Cognitive psychology is relevant to OHS in terms of how cognitive processes such as
memory, attention and decision making can affect work performance and safety,
including human interaction with complex systems and machines. Many models have
been developed to explain the correlation between cognitive factors and human
performance; some of these are addressed below
Cognitive architecture and information-processing models
As defined by Howes and Young (1997), a cognitive architecture “…embodies a
scientific hypothesis about those aspects of human cognition which are relatively constant
over time and relatively independent of task.” Although there are no perfect models of
mental function, the 1992 Wickens model, which evolved from Broadbent’s 1958 model
of information processing, is an instructive summary (Matthews, Davies, Westerman and
Stammers, 2000). In the Wickens information-processing model (Figure 3), sensory
information is received by the various sensory mechanisms, and basic perceptual
properties are preserved for a short time in the short-term sensory store (STSS). From the
STSS, information passes through perception and decision-making stages, which interact
with the memory system. A response is selected and executed, and there is feedback from
this response to environmental stimuli (Matthews et al., 2000).
Figure 3: The Wickens model of the general structure of information processing
(modified from Matthews et al., 2000)
Models of memory
Since 1949, when Hebb distinguished between short- and long-term memory,
psychologists have been fascinated by the capacity of these memory types and the
relationship between them. The popular conception of the limitations of short-term
memory was stimulated by Miller’s (1956) “magical number seven;” Miller noted that,
generally, people can hold “seven plus or minus two” chunks of information in short-term
memory before they are displaced by new information (Dehn, 2008). From the many
models of memory proposed over the past half-century, those discussed below have
enduring relevance.
Though influential, the modal model was found to be overly simplistic with insufficient
emphasis on memory processes (Dehn, 2008). In 1972, Craik and Lockhart’s ‘level of
processing’ model proposed that ‘deeper’ encoding of information involved greater
semantic analysis and resulted in longer retention. For example, when considering
processing of words, structural processing would involve focusing on the physical
features of the stimulus, such as whether words were presented in upper or lower case,
the number of letters. Higher level phonemic which focuses on what the word sounds
like. Semantic processing, which focuses on what the word means and represents, is a
deeper level of processing again.
In 1974, Baddeley and Hitch defined working memory as “a system for the temporary
holding and manipulation of information during the performance of a range of cognitive
tasks such as comprehension, learning, and reasoning” (Baddeley, 1986, p. 34). They
proposed a model of working memory that comprised a phonological loop (e.g. repeating
digits of a phone number), a visuospatial sketchpad that allowed for the temporary
storage and manipulation of visual information; and a central executive that controlled
the other components and limited the amount of information people can juggle while
making a decision (Dehn, 2008; Goldstein, 2007).
In the 1980s, Tulving asserted that the major long-term memory categories of episodic
memory (for dated recollections, e.g. where I was when I heard that Princess Diana had
died) and semantic memory (for general knowledge) were subsystems of the declarative
memory (‘knowing what’) system that deals with factual information, while the
procedural memory (‘knowing how’) deals with memories for skills and actions (e.g.
how to ride a bike) (see, for example, Dehn, 2008; Weiten, 2008.).
5.3 Cognitive biases in decision making and causal attribution
In terms of OHS practice, several cognitive biases that affect problem solving and
decision making are particularly relevant to people’s perceptions of risk; therefore, these
Personality psychology
There are a variety of approaches to personality psychology, many of which have proved
controversial. Some important theoretical perspectives that have contributed to our
understandings of individual differences are briefly outlined below.
Allport’s (1937, p. 48) definition of personality – “the dynamic organisation within the
individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his [sic] characteristic
behaviour and thought” – is recognised as among the most influential approaches
(Capitanio, Mendoza and Bentson, 2004; Kobasa, 1990). Allport clarified key concepts of
this definition, indicating that ‘dynamic organisation’ allows for the constant evolution
and self-regulation of personality, ‘psychophysical’ denotes the neural basis of
personality, rather than it just being a ‘mental’ attribute, and the use of the term
‘determine’ conveys how personality is thought to initiate specific acts within an
individual rather than be those behaviours. This contrasts with common informal
definitions of personality (which probably developed as a ‘shorthand’ in the absence of
clear understanding of the concept), where personality is stated to be the individual’s
characteristic behaviours and thoughts. For Allport, the trait – “a neuropsychic structure
having the capacity to render many stimuli functionally equivalent, and to initiate and
guide equivalent (meaningfully consistent) forms of adaptive and expressive behaviour”
(as cited in Carducci, 2009) – is the basic unit of personality study. His hierarchic model
of cardinal (i.e. most dominant), central and secondary traits has been useful for
integrating many of the personality variables studied in relation to health, and perhaps in
accounting for some of the discrepancies; for example, two individuals who score
similarly on trait X, but have different health outcomes, may differ in the relative
dominance of that trait in their personality
Personality testing
Personality profiling is often used for job-selection purposes, but the supporting evidence
it is not always conclusive, given the range of tests and methods used. Some ‘personality
tests’ are still popular, despite being based on theories that are no longer accepted in
mainstream psychology (e.g. the Myers Briggs Type Inventory is based on Jungian
theory, which is part of the psychodynamic tradition). Low correlations observed
between personality inventories and work performance may be due to several factors,
including:
· The work performance data used as a basis for personality-score comparisons are
not always reliable (e.g. supervisors’ ratings of performance)
· Studies of personality and work performance are sometimes performed without a
theoretical base (e.g. where there is no preordained reason to think that the
personality variable in question would have a relationship to the measured
performance variable; i.e. a ‘fishing trip’) (Matthews et al. 2003).
Caution should be exercised when using personality measures for selection or other
workplace purposes. Often it is advisable for independent specialist advice to be sought
from a psychologist.
6.2 Accident-prone personality
The central idea in the concept of the ‘accident-prone personality’ are that there are
people who have more injuries than others and that this stems from some enduring
individual difference. This was a popular idea from the 1920s to around the 1960s. It has
since been found that the group of people experiencing the most accidents were at best a
shifting group, and that accident “proneness” was transient (see Burnham, 2009).
Although it was suggested that “the accident-prone personality can be described variously
as aggressive, hostile, or overactive,…no permanent or stable personality trait of the
accident-prone person can be identified” (McKenna, 2000, p. 57). The discipline of
ergonomics led the change from trying to fit the worker to the job (eg. finding non
accident prone people to work machines and complete tasks), to fitting the task to the
worker (eg. by design of equipment, processes and procedures to complement the ways
humans perceive events, make decisions, and behave)
Mental disorders
There are many different theories about the development and expression of the various
psychiatric illnesses and psychological disorders, including the relative contribution of
genetics, childhood experiences, learning, etc. The degree to which workplace factors
contribute to a particular disorder is debated in compensation claims/cases. The relative
contributions of work and non-work-related factors need to be considered using whatever
evidence is available. An OHS professional should be aware of the categories of
psychiatric illness, defined by the American Psychiatric Association (APA, 2000), which
can impact the psychological wellbeing of workers.
These include:
· Delirium, dementia, amnesic and other cognitive disorders
· Mental disorders due to a general medical condition
· Substance-related disorders
· Schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders
· Mood disorders
· Anxiety disorders
· Somatoform disorders
· Factitious disorders
· Dissociative disorders
· Sexual and gender identity disorders
· Eating disorders
· Sleep disorders
· Impulse-control disorders
· Adjustment disorders
· Personality disorders (APA, 2000)
While any type of psychiatric illness can manifest in psychological disorder, those most
relevant to the work environment are mood and anxiety disorders. Mood disorders include
depressive disorders and bipolar disorders, the latter being characterised by alternating
periods of depression and mania. Signs and symptoms of depression include:
· moodiness that is out of character
· increased irritability and frustration
· finding it hard to take minor personal criticisms
Comments
Post a Comment