Research Article


DOI :10.26650/JECS2021-949898   IUP :10.26650/JECS2021-949898    Full Text (PDF)

Validity and Reliability Study of Safety Climate Scale

Salih DursunOğuz BaşolBelemir Şengül

Occupational accidents are accepted as one of the important problems that areas of today’s working life experienced due to significant economic, social, and psychological losses. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in the role of safety climate in preventing occupational accidents. A safe climate is the holistic perception shared by employees about the work environment. This research aims to adapt the safety climate scale developed by Hahn and Murphy into the Turkish language. A total of 191 metal industry employees participated in the research. Based on the confirmatory factor analysis results, the scale consists of six items and single factor safety climate scale (Chi-square/df: 2.23; RMSEA: 0.08; NFI: 0.98; NNFI: 0.98; CFI: 0.99; GFI: 0.97; and AGFI: 0.92). The internal consistency of the scale was calculated as 0.857 and item-total correlations ranged between 0.519 and 0.612. As a result, it was concluded that safety climate scale is valid and reliable for Turkish society.

DOI :10.26650/JECS2021-949898   IUP :10.26650/JECS2021-949898    Full Text (PDF)

Güvenlik İklimi Ölçeğinin Türkçe Geçerlik ve Güvenirlik Çalışması

Salih DursunOğuz BaşolBelemir Şengül

İş kazaları, yol açmış olduğu önemli ekonomik, sosyal ve psikolojik kayıplar nedeniyle günümüz çalışma hayatının önemli sorun alanlarından biri olarak kabul edilmektedir. Son yıllarda iş kazalarının önlenmesinde güvenlik ikliminin rolüne yönelik artan bir ilginin olduğu görülmektedir. Bu bağlamda güvenlik iklimi, çalışanların çalışma çevresi hakkında paylaşmış oldukları bütüncül algılarıdır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Hahn ve Murphy (2008) tarafında geliştirilen 6 madde ve tek boyuttan oluşan güvenlik iklimi ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışmasını yapmak ve Türkçe literatüre katkı sağlamaktır. Çalışmanın örneklemini metal sanayiinde çalışan 191 çalışan oluşturmaktadır. Araştırma verilerinin analizinde SPSS 22 ve LISREL 8.71 programları kullanılmıştır. Yapılan analiz sonucunda, ölçekte bulunan maddelerin faktör yükleri 0,649 ile 0,836 arasında değiştiği ve açıklanan toplam varyansın %58,90 olduğu tespit edilmiştir. Gerçekleştirilen doğrulayıcı faktör analizi sonuçlarına göre, güvenlik iklimi ölçeği (Ki-kare/serbestlik değeri: 2,23; RMSEA: 0.08; NFI: 0.98; NNFI: 0.98; CFI: 0.99; GFI: 0.97 ve AGFI: 0.92) orijinal ölçekte olduğu gibi 6 madde ve tek boyuttan oluşmaktadır. Ölçeğin içsel tutarlığı 0,857 olarak hesaplanmıştır ve madde-toplam korelasyonlarının 0,519 ile 0,612 arasında değiştiği görülmüştür. Elde edilen bulgular, çalışanların güvenlik iklimi algılarını değerlendirmede güvenlik iklimi ölçeğinin geçerli ve güvenilir bir ölçüm aracı olduğunu göstermektedir.


EXTENDED ABSTRACT


The International Labor Organization (ILO) estimates that approximately 2.3 million employees around the world are exposed to work-related accidents or diseases every year. Worldwide, there are around 340 million occupational accidents and 160 million victims of work-related illnesses every year. In recent years, there has been a rapid increase in the number of studies aimed at the causes and preventions of occupational accidents. The unsafe behaviors of employees are emphasized as the primary cause of occupational accidents and it is estimated that 60%–80% of the occupational accidents are caused by unsafe behaviors of the employees (Choudhry & Fang, 2008, p. 567; Huang et al., 2018, p. 109).

There is an increasing interest in the role of safety climate in the prevention of work-related accidents and injuries (Hahn & Murphy, 2008, p. 1047). Safety climate is widely recognized as an important organizational factor in ensuring workplace safety. Studies dealing with the relationship between safety climate and outcome variables showed that safety climate is related to safety behavior of employees (Glendon & Litherland, 2001; Cooper & Philips, 2004; Sadullah & Kanten, 2009; Lu & Yang, 2011; Tholen et al., 2013; Lyu et al., 2018), safety outcome, and safety performance (Griffin & Neal, 2000; Clarke, 2006; Wu et al., 2008; Singer et al., 2009; Probst & Estrada, 2010; Beus et al., 2010).

This research aims to adapt safety climate scale developed by Hahn and Murphy in 2008 into the Turkish language. The research was conducted voluntarily with a total of 191 people working in the metal industry employees in Trabzon, Turkey. Two sections in the questionnaire were used in this research. The first part aims to determine the demographic characteristics of the participants (gender, marital status, educational age, and work experience). The second part consists of six-item scale and a single factor safety climate scale, which was developed by Hahn and Murphy (2008). Five-point Likert-type assessment (1: strongly disagree; 5: strongly agree), and SPSS 22, LISREL 8.71 programs were used for data analysis.

According to the results, all participants were male, 67% were married and 53.9% had a primary or secondary school education. The ages of the participants ranged between 21 and 54, and the mean age was 35 ± 8.12. The duration of the experience of the participants ranged from 1 to 15 years, and the average experience duration was 5 ± 3.60 years.

The data set was found to be suitable for explanatory factor analysis (KMO: 0.839; Bartlett’s p: 0.00). The results of exploratory factor analysis (the extraction method was principal component analysis, the rotation method was varimax with Kaiser Normalization), the six-item scale with factor loads ranging from 0.649 to 0.836 were collected in a single factor with 58.90% of the total variance. In this case, the items on the scale matched the factor structure in the original study.

The results of confirmatory factor analysis showed that all paths between items were significant (t > 1.96) and the standardized factor loadings of all items were > 0.5. Based on the examination of the goodness of fit statistics (Chi-square/freedom value: 2.23; RMSEA: 0.08; NFI: 0.98; NNFI: 0.98; CFI: 0.99; GFI: 0.97 and AGFI: 0.92), all values are above the acceptable goodness of fit statistics; thus, it is appropriate to say that the scale is validated with a single factor. Therefore, it can be said that the scale for safety climate scale is valid.

Cronbach’s Alpha was used for the reliability of safety climate scale. As a result, the value of the scale was 0.857. These values indicated that the scale is reliable. 

This study shows that the internal consistency coefficient does not decrease significantly if any of the items in the scale are deleted. Therefore, the six-item scale was found to have a high level of reliability. Furthermore, item-total correlations were > 0.30 (ranged from 0.519–0.612).


PDF View

References

  • Bayram, N. (2004). Sosyal bilimlerde SPSS ile veri analizi. Bursa: Ezgi Kitabevi. google scholar
  • Beavers, A. S., Lounsbury, J. W., Richards, J. K., Huck, S. W. Skolits, G. J., & Esquivel, S. L. (2013). Practical considerations for using exploratory factor analysis in educational research. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 18 (6), 1-13. google scholar
  • Beus, J., Payne, S., Bergman, M., & Arthur, W. (2010). Safety climate and injuries: An examination of theoretical and empirical relationships. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95(4), 713-727. google scholar
  • Bilir, N. (2016). İş sağlığı ve güvenliği. Ankara: Güneş Tıp Kitabevleri. google scholar
  • Choudhry, R. M., & Fang, D. (2008). Why operatives engage in unsafe work behavior: Investigating factors on construction sites. Safety Science, 46, 566-584. google scholar
  • Clarke, S. (2006). The relationship between safety climate and safety performance: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 11(4), 315-327. google scholar
  • Cooper, D. M., & Phillips, R. A (2004). Exploratory analysis of the safety climate and safety behaviour relationship. Journal of Safety Research, 35, 497-512. google scholar
  • Çelik, H. E. ve Yılmaz, V. (2013). Lisrel 9.1 ile yapısal eşitlik modellemesi, Ankara: Anı Yayıncılık. google scholar
  • Çömlekçi, M. ve Başol, O. (2019). Sosyal medya haberlerine güven ve kullanıcı teyit alışkanlıkları üzerine Bir inceleme. Galatasaray Üniversitesi İletişim Dergisi, 30, 55-77. google scholar
  • Dejoy, D. M., Schaffer, B. S., Wilson, M. G., Vandenberg, R. J., & Butts, M. M (2004). Creating safer workplaces: Assessing the determinants and role of safety climate. Journal of Safety Research, 35(1), 81-90. google scholar
  • Dülgeroğlu, İ. (2012). Marka kişiliği, hizmet kalitesi, hizmete duyulan güven ve sadakat ilişkisi üzerine yapısal eşitlik modellemesi analizi. (Doktora tezi). Uludağ Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Bursa. google scholar
  • Eryılmaz, İ., Dirik, D. ve Odabaşoğlu, Ş. (2019). Güvenlik iklimi algısı ve iş performansı ilişkisinde genel öz yeterliliğin düzenleyici rolü: Helikopter teknisyenleri üzerine bir araştırma. Manas Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi, 8(2), 1854-1870. google scholar
  • Evans, D. D., Judd, H. M., Wiedenbeck, J. K., & Ray, C. D. (2005), Relationships between organizational climates and safety-related events at four wood manufacturers. Forest Products Journal, 55(6), 23-28. google scholar
  • Garcia, A. M., Boix, P., & Canosa, C. (2004). Why do workers behave unsafely at work? Determinants of safe work practices in industrial workers. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 61, 239-246. google scholar
  • Glendon, A. I., & Litherland, D. K. (2001). Safety climate factors, group differences and safety behaviour in Rroad construction. Safety Science, 39, 157-188. google scholar
  • Gonzalez, A., Bonilla, J., Quintero, M., Reyes, C., & Chavarro, A. (2016). Analysis of the causes and consequences of accidents occurring in two constructions projects. Revista Ingenieria de Construccion, 31 (1), 5-16. google scholar
  • Griffin M. A., & Neal, A. (2000). Perceptions of safety at work: A framework for linking safety climate to safety performance, knowledge, and motivation. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 347-358. google scholar
  • Hahn, S. E., & Murphy, L. R. (2008). A short scale for measuring safety climate. Safety Science, 46(7), 1047-1066. google scholar
  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E (2010). Multivariate data analysis a global perspective. USA: Pearson. google scholar
  • Huang, L., Wu, C., Wang, B., Ouyang, Q., & Lin, H. (2019). An unsafe behaviour formation mechanism based on risk perception. Human Factors Management, 29: 109-117. google scholar
  • Huang, Y. H., Zohar, D., Robertson, M. M., Garabet, A., Murphya, L. A., & Leea J. (2013). Development and validation of safety climate scales for mobile remote workers using utility/electrical workers as exemple. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 59, 76-86. google scholar
  • ILO (2020). World statistics. Retrieved from: https://www.ilo.org/moscow/areas-of-work/occupational-safety-and-health/WCMS_249278/lang--en/index.htm google scholar
  • Johnson, S. E. (2007). The predictive validity of safety climate. Journal of Safety Research, 38(5), 511-521. google scholar
  • Karadal, H., Merdan, E. ve Abubakar, M. (2019). Güvenlik iklimi ve güvenlik kültürünün işyeri yaralanmaları üzerine etkisinde güvenlik davranışlarının aracılık rolü: Döküm sanayinde bir araştırma. Anemon Muş Alparslan Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 7(6), 341-351. google scholar
  • Kline, R. B. (2013). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Y. Petscher ve C. Schatsschneider, (Ed.), Applied Quantitative Analysis in the Social Sciences (171- 207). New York: Routledge. google scholar
  • Lu, C. S., & Yang, C. S. (2011). Safety climate and safety behavior in the passenger ferry context. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43, 329-341. google scholar
  • Lyu, S., Hon, C. K. H., Chan, A. P. C., Wong, F. K. W., & Javed, A. A. (2018). Relationships among safety climate, safety behavior, and safety outcomes for ethnic minority construction workers. International Journal Environment Research and Public Health, 15(3), 484. google scholar
  • Neal, A., & Griffin M. A. (2002). Safety climate and safety behaviour. Australian Journal of Management, 27, 67-78. google scholar
  • Neal, A., Griffin, M. A., & Hart, P. M. (2000). The impact of organizational climate on safety climate and individual behaviour. Safety Science, 34, 99-109. google scholar
  • Özdemir, L., Erdem, H. ve Kalkın, G. (2016). Kamu çalışanlarının güvenlik iklimi algılarının iş tatmini ve iş performansı üzerine etkisi. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Vizyoner Dergisi, 7(15), 59-69. google scholar
  • Payne, S. C., Bergman, M. E., Rodriguez, J. M., Beus, J. M., & Henning, J. B. (2010). Leading and lagging: Process safety climate—incident relationships at one year. In: Papers Presented at the 2009 International Symposium of the Mary Kay O’Connor Process Safety Center 23, pp. 806-812. google scholar
  • Probst, T. M., & Estrada, A. X. (2010). Accident under-reporting among employees: testing the moderating influence of psychological safety climate and supervisor enforcement of safety practices. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 1438-1444. google scholar
  • Sadullah, Ö. ve Kanten, S. (2009). A research on the effect of organizational safety climate upon the safe behaviors. Ege Akademik Bakış, 9(3), 923-932. google scholar
  • Seo, D. C. (2005). An explicative model of unsafe work behavior. Safety Science, 43(3), 187-211. google scholar
  • SGK (2020). İstatistik yıllıkları. Erişim adresi: http://www.sgk.gov.tr/wps/portal/sgk/tr/kurumsal/istatistik/sgk_ istatistik_yilliklari google scholar
  • Singer, S., Lin, S., Falwell, A., Gaba, D., & Baker, L. (2009). Relationship of safety climate and safety performance in hospitals. Health services research, 44, 399-421. google scholar
  • Şantaş, F., Şantaş, G., Özer, Ö. ve Şahin, D. S. (2018). Sağlık çalışanlarının güvenlik iklimi algılarının belirlenmesine ilişkin bir kamu hastanesinde araştırma. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 30, 297307. google scholar
  • Şimşek, Ö. F. (2007). Yapısal eşitlik modellemesine giriş. Ankara: Ekinoks. google scholar
  • Taber, K. (2018). The use of cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research ınstruments in science education. Research in Science Education, 48(6), 1273-1296. google scholar
  • Taşkın, Ç. (2008). Pazarlama stratejilerinin oluşturulmasında marka değerinin etkisi ve bir uygulama. (Doktora Tezi). Uludağ Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Bursa. google scholar
  • Taylor, J. A., Davis, A. L., Shepler, L. J., Lee, J., Cannuscio, C., Zohar, D., & Resick, C. (2019). Development and validation of the fire service safety climate scale. Safety Science, 118, 126-144. google scholar
  • Tholen, S. L., Pousette, A., & Törner, M. (2013). Causal relations between psychosocial conditions, safety climate and safety behaviour: A multi-level investigation. Safety Science, 55, 62-69. google scholar
  • Türen, U., Gökmen, Y., Tokmak, İ. ve Bekmezci, M. (2014). Güvenlik iklimi ölçeğinin geçerlik ve güvenilirlik çalışması. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 19(4), 171-190. google scholar
  • Vinodkumar, M. N., & Bhasi, M. (2008). Safety climate factors and its relationship with accidents and personal attributes in the chemical industry. Safety Science, 47, 659-667. google scholar
  • Wiegmann, D. A., Zhang, H., Von Thaden, T., Sharma, G., & Mitchell, A. (2002). A synthesis of safety culture and safety climate research. Technical Report ARL-02-3/FAA-02-2, Aviation Research Lab Institue of Aviation. google scholar
  • Wu, T. C., Chen, C. H., & Li, C. C. (2008). A correlation among safety leadership, safety climate and safety performance. Journal of Loss Prevention in the Process Industries, 21, 307-318. google scholar
  • Yule, S., Flin, R., & Murdy, A. (2007). The role of management and safety climate in preventing risk-taking at work. Interenational Journal of Risk Assessment and Management, 7(2), 137-151. google scholar
  • Zhu, C. J., Fan, D. Fu, G., & Clissold, G. (2010). Occupational safety in China: Safety climate and its influence on safety-related behavior. China Information, 24(1), 27-59. google scholar
  • Zohar, D. (1980). Safety climate in industrial organizations: Theoretical and applied implications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 65(1), 96-102. google scholar

Citations

Copy and paste a formatted citation or use one of the options to export in your chosen format


EXPORT



APA

Dursun, S., Başol, O., & Şengül, B. (2022). Validity and Reliability Study of Safety Climate Scale. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 0(65), 203-216. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-949898


AMA

Dursun S, Başol O, Şengül B. Validity and Reliability Study of Safety Climate Scale. Journal of Economy Culture and Society. 2022;0(65):203-216. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-949898


ABNT

Dursun, S.; Başol, O.; Şengül, B. Validity and Reliability Study of Safety Climate Scale. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, [Publisher Location], v. 0, n. 65, p. 203-216, 2022.


Chicago: Author-Date Style

Dursun, Salih, and Oğuz Başol and Belemir Şengül. 2022. “Validity and Reliability Study of Safety Climate Scale.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0, no. 65: 203-216. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-949898


Chicago: Humanities Style

Dursun, Salih, and Oğuz Başol and Belemir Şengül. Validity and Reliability Study of Safety Climate Scale.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0, no. 65 (Oct. 2022): 203-216. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-949898


Harvard: Australian Style

Dursun, S & Başol, O & Şengül, B 2022, 'Validity and Reliability Study of Safety Climate Scale', Journal of Economy Culture and Society, vol. 0, no. 65, pp. 203-216, viewed 5 Oct. 2022, https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-949898


Harvard: Author-Date Style

Dursun, S. and Başol, O. and Şengül, B. (2022) ‘Validity and Reliability Study of Safety Climate Scale’, Journal of Economy Culture and Society, 0(65), pp. 203-216. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-949898 (5 Oct. 2022).


MLA

Dursun, Salih, and Oğuz Başol and Belemir Şengül. Validity and Reliability Study of Safety Climate Scale.” Journal of Economy Culture and Society, vol. 0, no. 65, 2022, pp. 203-216. [Database Container], https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-949898


Vancouver

Dursun S, Başol O, Şengül B. Validity and Reliability Study of Safety Climate Scale. Journal of Economy Culture and Society [Internet]. 5 Oct. 2022 [cited 5 Oct. 2022];0(65):203-216. Available from: https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-949898 doi: 10.26650/JECS2021-949898


ISNAD

Dursun, Salih - Başol, Oğuz - Şengül, Belemir. Validity and Reliability Study of Safety Climate Scale”. Journal of Economy Culture and Society 0/65 (Oct. 2022): 203-216. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2021-949898



TIMELINE


Submitted09.06.2021
Accepted03.10.2021
Published Online25.10.2021

LICENCE


Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC)

This license lets others remix, tweak, and build upon your work non-commercially, and although their new works must also acknowledge you and be non-commercial, they don’t have to license their derivative works on the same terms.


SHARE




Istanbul University Press aims to contribute to the dissemination of ever growing scientific knowledge through publication of high quality scientific journals and books in accordance with the international publishing standards and ethics. Istanbul University Press follows an open access, non-commercial, scholarly publishing.