Logo image
Systems-based accident analysis methods: A comparison of Accimap, HFACS, and STAMP
Journal article   Peer reviewed

Systems-based accident analysis methods: A comparison of Accimap, HFACS, and STAMP

Paul M Salmon, M Cornelissen and M Trotter
Safety Science, Vol.50(4), pp.1158-1170
2012
url
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.11.009View
Published Version

Abstract

accidents accident analysis led outdoor activities accimap HFACS STAMP UPLOADS project
Three accident causation models, each with their own associated approach to accident analysis, currentlydominate the human factors literature. Although the models are in general agreement that accidents representa complex, systems phenomenon, the subsequent analysis methods prescribed are very different.This paper presents a case study-based comparison of the three methods: Accimap, HFACS and STAMP.Each was used independently by separate analysts to analyse the recent Mangatepopo gorge tragedyin which six students and their teacher drowned while participating in a led gorge walking activity.The outputs were then compared and contrasted, revealing significant differences across the three methods.These differences are discussed in detail, and the implications for accident analysis are articulated. Inconclusion, a modified version of the Accimap method, incorporating domain specific taxonomies of failuremodes, is recommended for future accident analysis efforts.

Details

Metrics

1 File views/ downloads
1858 Record Views

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Web Of Science research areas
Engineering, Industrial
Operations Research & Management Science

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#3 Good Health and Well-Being

Source: InCites

Logo image