(3.236.6.6) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/04/22 19:42
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:甘鎮嘉
研究生(外文):Cheng-Chia Kan
論文名稱:探討工地管理階層之營建災害認知
論文名稱(外文):Elucidating the construction accident awareness of construction managers
指導教授:陳維東陳維東引用關係
指導教授(外文):Wei-Tong Chen
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立雲林科技大學
系所名稱:營建工程系碩士班
學門:工程學門
學類:土木工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2008
畢業學年度:96
語文別:中文
論文頁數:81
中文關鍵詞:職業災害認知工地管理階層
外文關鍵詞:construction site managercognitionoccupational disaster
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:16
  • 點閱點閱:923
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:167
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
營建業在我國基礎建設,一直扮演著舉足輕重的角色,而我國重大職業災害發生率也屬營建業最高,2006年營建業的職業災害發生率更較全產業高出2.96倍之多。雖然工地管理階層的災害認知可能與職業災害息息相關,但其關係如何至今仍少有相關研究。
本研究旨在探討工地管理階層的災害營建認知,並分析相關因素對於職業災害之影響。首先,透過「行政院勞委會統計之營建業職業災害實例」、災害與認知理論等文獻回顧,剖析災害實例的主要類型。其次,以上述結果作為問卷調查構面設計的基礎,針對公路總局新建工程處所屬各工地之管理階層,進行可能引發營建勞工不安全行為的認同程度之問卷調查,並驗證四項研究假設:個人變項與災害類型交叉(卡方)檢定具有正相關、個人變項與災害認知具有差異、災害類型與災害認知具有差異、災害認知與工地狀況具有相關。最後,分別採用次數、百分比、描述性、敘述性統計、交叉(卡方)分析、單因子變異數分析(Oneway-ANOVA)及Pearson積差相關等方法分析回收的問卷。
研究結果顯示,(1)工地管理階層之經驗、學歷及安全衛生教育訓練對災害認知、災害風險態度具有顯著的相關性;(2)認同程度(包括身、心理、安全態度、相關規定指示、他人因素)乃是引發營建勞工不安全行為的主要因素;(3)管理階層工作總年資、學歷、教育訓練及工地安全背景等經驗在營建災害認知上,可推判勞工的工作安全態度、工作安全的習慣及職業災害引發。此外,本研究以上述研究發現為基礎,針對事業單位在推廣勞工安全衛生教育訓練及勞工安全衛生管理分別提出建言。
The Taiwan construction industry plays a pivotal role in the island economy. However, the construction industry has the highest incidence of occupational accidents. For example, the incidence of occupational accidents for the construction industry was 2.96 times that of the entire industry in 2006. Although the accidents awareness of potential accidents at a construction site by management may be related to occupational accidents, few studies have explored this relationship.
This study investigates accident awareness at construction sites by management and analyzes the factors that influence occupational accidents. First, this study conducts a literature review of accident and construction theory, and analysis of the main disaster types. Second, a questionnaire, based on literature findings, which focuses on each administrable class under the Directorate General of Highways, M.O.T.C. for new construction, obtains laborer opinions regarding unsafe behaviors. The four research hypotheses are as follows: (1) individual variables and accidents type were related, (2) individual variables and accidents cognition were related, (3) accidents type and accidents cognition were related, and (4) accidents cognition and the worksite conditions were related. Finally, descriptive statistics, ANOVA and several statistic methods were performed to clarify the unknown relation listed above.
Analytical results show that (1) the experience of the site manager, educational background, and extent of safety and health training are significantly related to accident awareness and accident risk. Additionally, (2) the degree of approval (including the body, psychology, secure manner, correlative stipulation instruction of the site manager and other factors) is the primary factor triggering unsafe behaviors by laborers. (3) Total work experience, length of service, educational performance, education level, training and worksite security background, are related to laborer job safety, job safety practices and accident initiation. Furthermore, this study adopted research results as a foundation for promoting laborer safety and health education and training.
中文摘要 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i
英文摘要 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ii
誌謝 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- iv
目錄 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- v
表目錄 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- vii
圖目錄 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ix
一、 緒論------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
1.1 研究動機------------------------------------------------------------------- 1
1.2 研究目的------------------------------------------------------------------- 3
1.3 研究範圍與限制--------------------------------------------------------- 4
1.4 研究流程------------------------------------------------------------------- 4
1.5 論文架構------------------------------------------------------------------- 6
二、 文獻回顧------------------------------------------------------------------- 7
2.1 營建業職業災害實例之統計彙整----------------------------------- 7
2.2 認知與態度理論--------------------------------------------------------- 12
2.3 災害風險理論------------------------------------------------------------ 17
2.4 營建業職業災害-------------------------------------------------------- 20
2.5 結語------------------------------------------------------------------------- 23
三、 研究設計與方法--------------------------------------------------------- 24
3.1 研究架構------------------------------------------------------------------- 24
3.2 研究假設------------------------------------------------------------------- 24
3.3 研究工具------------------------------------------------------------------- 25
3.4 分析方法與資料處理-------------------------------------------------- 28
3.5 結語------------------------------------------------------------------------- 30
四、 資料分析與處理--------------------------------------------------------- 32
4.1 正式問卷發放、回收及信度分析------------------------------------- 32
4.2 描述性統計分析--------------------------------------------------------- 33
4.3 敘述性統計分析-------------------------------------------------------- 41
4.4 假設檢定------------------------------------------------------------------- 46
4.5 結語------------------------------------------------------------------------- 56
五、 結論與建議---------------------------------------------------------------- 58
5.1 結論------------------------------------------------------------------------- 58
5.2 後續研究建議------------------------------------------------------------- 59
參考文獻 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 60
附錄一 不同個人變相與災害認知差異scheffe法事後比較------------ 62
附錄二 Pearson積差相關分析-------------------------------------------------- 63
附錄三 問卷設計------------------------------------------------------------------- 66
作者簡歷 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 70
[1]The Council of Labor Affairs. Annual Report of Labor Statistics, Taipei, 2000.
[2]Zohar, D., 1980, Safety climate in industrial organization:“Theoret ical and applied implications,” Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol.65, pp. 96-102.
[3]Cox, S., and Cox, T., 1991, “The structure of employee attitudes to safety: An European example” Workand Stress, pp. 93-106, Feb.
[4]Agapiuo, A., 2002, “Perceptions of gender roles and attitudes toward work among male and female operatives in the Scottish construction industry,” Journal Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 20, pp. 697-705.
[5]Arboleda, C.A., and Abraham, D.M., 2004, “Fatalities in trenching operations- analysis using models of accident causation,” Journal Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 130, No. 2, pp. 273-280.
[6]Tam, C.M., Fung, W.H., Yeung, C.L., and Tong, C.F., 2003, “Relationship between construction safety sings and symbol recognition and characteristics of construction personal”, Journal Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 21, pp. 745-753, Feb.
[7]Chua, D.K.H., and Goh, Y.M., 2004, “Incident causation model for improving feedback of safety knowledge,” Journal Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 130, No. 4, pp. 542-551.
[8]Fang, D.P., Huang, X.Y., and Hinze, J., 2004, “Benchmarking studies on construction safety management in China”, Journal Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 130, No. 3, pp. 424-432.
[9]Graza, J.M.D., Hancher, D.E., and Decker, L., 1998, “Analysis of safety in construction”, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 124, No. 4, pp. 312-314.
[10]Hinze, J., Pedersen, C., and Fredley, J., 1998, “Identifying root cause of construction injuries,” Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 124, No. 1, pp. 67-71.
[11]Gallstedt, M., 2003, “Working conditions in projects: perception of stress and motivation among project team numbers and project managers,” International Journal of project management, Vol. 21, pp. 449-455.
[12]Lee, S., and Halpin, D.W., 2003, “Predictive tool for estimating accident risk,” Journal Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 129, No. 4, pp. 431-436.
[13]Chandra, V., and Loosemore, M., 2004, “Women’s self-perception: an inter-sector comparison of construction, legal and nursing professionals,” Journal Construction Management and Economics, Vol. 22, Nov, pp. 947-956.
[14]Lanoie, P., and Trottier, L., 1998, “Cost and benefits of preventing workplace accidents: Going from a mechanical to a manual handling system,” Journal of Safety research, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 65-75.
[15]Petersen, D. ,1998, Techniques of safety management, A system approach, Des Plaines, Illinois.
[16]DeJoy,D.M., 2005,“Behavior change versus culture change: Divergent approaches to managing workplace safety,” Safety Science, Vol. 43, No. 2 , pp. 105-129, Feb.
[17]柯俊安,2005,我國營造業職業災害特性評估,國立雲林科技大學營建工程所,碩士論文,斗六。
[18]洪裕宏,1992,認知科學:心智的探索,科學月刊,認知科學專輯,2月,台北。
[19]張淑美,1996,死亡學與死亡教育,國中生之死亡概念、死亡態度、死亡教育態度及相關因素之研究,高雄。
[20]張春興,1989,張氏心理學辭典,東華書局,頁557- 630,台北。
[21]黃乾全、蕭景祥、董貞吟、劉玉文,2000,“營造業勞工墜落事故相關因素之研究”,勞工安全衛生研究季刊,第8卷,第4期,頁423-440。
[22]吳世雄,1991,“美國職業安全管理簡介”,工業安全衛生月刊,第28卷,頁49-56。
[23]郭今玄、吳佳蓉、陳俊瑜,2006,“環境與安衛風險評估整合工具之建置與應用研究-以研究機構為例”,勞工安全衛生研究季刊,第14卷,第3期,頁229-241。
[24]林利國,2004,“防災規劃與風險管理”,國立台北科技大學,土木與防災研究所,台北。
[25]陳伸賢,1997,“安全衛生與企業發展”,工業安全衛生月刊,6月,頁11-19。
[26]黃清賢,1995,工業安全與管理,三民書局,台北。
[27]王維志、周世傑、劉正章,2005,“營造安全與工程進度之整合管理”,中國土木水利工程學刊,17卷,第3期,頁517-528。
[28]林楨中、王澤雄,2003,“營造業重大職業災害分析─不安全行為及狀況”,行政勞工委員會勞工安全衛生研究所委託研究報告IOSH91-S312,台北。
[29]陳進隆,2001,台灣地區重大與非重大職災人口統計因素分析,國立台灣科技大學工業管理系,博士論文,台北。
[30]張庭彰,2004,重大職災暨營造業墜落職災之情境分析與預防措施,國立台灣科技大學工業管理系,博士論文,台北。
[22] 蔡明田、陳本明、莊立民、蔡皓鈞,2003,“影響勞工工作安全認知相關因素之研究-管理影響工作安全之模式驗證”,人力資源管理學報,第3卷,第3期,頁127-152。
[23] 陳朝琴,2005,國民小學家長參與學校教育對教師教學效能影響之研究,國立台北教育大學,碩士論文,台北。
[24] 林傑斌、劉明德,2003,SPSS11.0與統計模式建構,初版,文魁資訊,台北。
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔