Cargando…

Controlled versus Automatic Processes: Which Is Dominant to Safety? The Moderating Effect of Inhibitory Control

This study explores the precursors of employees' safety behaviors based on a dual-process model, which suggests that human behaviors are determined by both controlled and automatic cognitive processes. Employees' responses to a self-reported survey on safety attitudes capture their control...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Xu, Yaoshan, Li, Yongjuan, Ding, Weidong, Lu, Fan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3919723/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24520338
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087881
_version_ 1782303068136669184
author Xu, Yaoshan
Li, Yongjuan
Ding, Weidong
Lu, Fan
author_facet Xu, Yaoshan
Li, Yongjuan
Ding, Weidong
Lu, Fan
author_sort Xu, Yaoshan
collection PubMed
description This study explores the precursors of employees' safety behaviors based on a dual-process model, which suggests that human behaviors are determined by both controlled and automatic cognitive processes. Employees' responses to a self-reported survey on safety attitudes capture their controlled cognitive process, while the automatic association concerning safety measured by an Implicit Association Test (IAT) reflects employees' automatic cognitive processes about safety. In addition, this study investigates the moderating effects of inhibition on the relationship between self-reported safety attitude and safety behavior, and that between automatic associations towards safety and safety behavior. The results suggest significant main effects of self-reported safety attitude and automatic association on safety behaviors. Further, the interaction between self-reported safety attitude and inhibition and that between automatic association and inhibition each predict unique variances in safety behavior. Specifically, the safety behaviors of employees with lower level of inhibitory control are influenced more by automatic association, whereas those of employees with higher level of inhibitory control are guided more by self-reported safety attitudes. These results suggest that safety behavior is the joint outcome of both controlled and automatic cognitive processes, and the relative importance of these cognitive processes depends on employees' individual differences in inhibitory control. The implications of these findings for theoretical and practical issues are discussed at the end.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3919723
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39197232014-02-11 Controlled versus Automatic Processes: Which Is Dominant to Safety? The Moderating Effect of Inhibitory Control Xu, Yaoshan Li, Yongjuan Ding, Weidong Lu, Fan PLoS One Research Article This study explores the precursors of employees' safety behaviors based on a dual-process model, which suggests that human behaviors are determined by both controlled and automatic cognitive processes. Employees' responses to a self-reported survey on safety attitudes capture their controlled cognitive process, while the automatic association concerning safety measured by an Implicit Association Test (IAT) reflects employees' automatic cognitive processes about safety. In addition, this study investigates the moderating effects of inhibition on the relationship between self-reported safety attitude and safety behavior, and that between automatic associations towards safety and safety behavior. The results suggest significant main effects of self-reported safety attitude and automatic association on safety behaviors. Further, the interaction between self-reported safety attitude and inhibition and that between automatic association and inhibition each predict unique variances in safety behavior. Specifically, the safety behaviors of employees with lower level of inhibitory control are influenced more by automatic association, whereas those of employees with higher level of inhibitory control are guided more by self-reported safety attitudes. These results suggest that safety behavior is the joint outcome of both controlled and automatic cognitive processes, and the relative importance of these cognitive processes depends on employees' individual differences in inhibitory control. The implications of these findings for theoretical and practical issues are discussed at the end. Public Library of Science 2014-02-10 /pmc/articles/PMC3919723/ /pubmed/24520338 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087881 Text en © 2014 Xu et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Xu, Yaoshan
Li, Yongjuan
Ding, Weidong
Lu, Fan
Controlled versus Automatic Processes: Which Is Dominant to Safety? The Moderating Effect of Inhibitory Control
title Controlled versus Automatic Processes: Which Is Dominant to Safety? The Moderating Effect of Inhibitory Control
title_full Controlled versus Automatic Processes: Which Is Dominant to Safety? The Moderating Effect of Inhibitory Control
title_fullStr Controlled versus Automatic Processes: Which Is Dominant to Safety? The Moderating Effect of Inhibitory Control
title_full_unstemmed Controlled versus Automatic Processes: Which Is Dominant to Safety? The Moderating Effect of Inhibitory Control
title_short Controlled versus Automatic Processes: Which Is Dominant to Safety? The Moderating Effect of Inhibitory Control
title_sort controlled versus automatic processes: which is dominant to safety? the moderating effect of inhibitory control
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3919723/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24520338
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0087881
work_keys_str_mv AT xuyaoshan controlledversusautomaticprocesseswhichisdominanttosafetythemoderatingeffectofinhibitorycontrol
AT liyongjuan controlledversusautomaticprocesseswhichisdominanttosafetythemoderatingeffectofinhibitorycontrol
AT dingweidong controlledversusautomaticprocesseswhichisdominanttosafetythemoderatingeffectofinhibitorycontrol
AT lufan controlledversusautomaticprocesseswhichisdominanttosafetythemoderatingeffectofinhibitorycontrol