Evaluation of risk perception occupational in workers of a company of construction in Bogotá D.C.

Evaluación de la percepción del riesgo ocupacional en trabajadores de una empresa del sector de la construcción en Bogotá D.C.

Published 2015-06-30

Open | Download
PDF (Spanish) FLIP HTML (Spanish)
Issue
Vol. 13 No. 23 (2015)
Section
Artículo Original Producto de Investigación
How to Cite
Evaluation of risk perception occupational in workers of a company of construction in Bogotá D.C. (2015). NOVA, 13(23). https://doi.org/10.22490/24629448.1709
doi

https://doi.org/10.22490/24629448.1709
Dimensions
PlumX
license

Licencia Creative Commons

NOVA by http://www.unicolmayor.edu.co/publicaciones/index.php/nova is distributed under a license creative commons non comertial-atribution-withoutderive 4.0 international.

Furthermore, the authors keep their property intellectual rights over the articles.

 

Yuri Lilian González
UNAD
    Show authors biography
    Objective. Assessing risk perception among employees of a company in the construction sector in Bogota DC from the psychometric paradigm Materials and methods. Two questionnaires were applied, which helped identify the activities that workers considered as more dangerous, the magnitude of risk and the attributes that underlie perception. Results. The findings indicate that workers may be considering more often attributes of immediacy of consequences to determine the severity of the damage that the degree of fear or rejection by those activities which are considered as more harmful to health and wellness. In the same way became clear that a magnitude of high risk is perceived preferably in newfangled activities for workers and found that although the magnitude of the risk is high, perceived control over risks and knowledge of them that allows them to take risk without fear of causing damage to your health.

    Article visits 883 | PDF visits 548

    Downloads

    Download data is not yet available.
    1. Morillejo EA, Muñoz CP, Almería U De. La percepción del riesgo en la prevención de accidentes laborales. Apunt Psicol [Internet]. 2002;20(3):415–126. Available from: http://www.cop.es/delegaci/andocci/files/contenidos/VOL20_3_6.pdf
    2. Slovic P, Finucane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. Risk as analysis and risk as feelings. Risk Anal [Internet]. 2004;24(2). Available from: papers2://publication/uuid/F4B3EA59-C2F7-4F62-9223-701C27F152C2
    3. Sjöberg L. Factors in Risk Perception. Risk Anal ysis [Internet]. 2000;20(1-12). Available from: http://www.readcube.com/articles/10.1111%2F0272-4332.00001?r3_referer=wol&tracking_action=preview_click&show_checkout=1
    4. Puy RA. Percepción social del riesgo: Dimensiones de evaluación y predicción. Universida. 2000. 408 p.
    5. Wildavsky a., Dake K. heories of risk perception: Who fears what and why? Daedalus [Internet]. 1990;119(4):41–60. Available from: http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.unal.edu.co/stable/20025337?Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=“Theories of Risk Perception: Who Fears What and Why?”&searchUri=/action/doBasicSearch?Query=%22Theories+of+Risk+Perception%3A+Who%
    6. Slovic P. Perception of Risk Author ( s ): Paul Slovic. Science (80- ) [Internet]. 1987;236(4799):280–5. Available from: http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.unal.edu.co/stable/pdf/1698637.pdf?acceptTC=true
    7. Bickerstaff K. Risk perception research: socio-cultural perspectives on the public experience of air pollution. Environ Int [Internet]. 2004 Aug [cited 2015 Jun 25];30(6):827–40. Available from: http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.unal.edu.co/stable/pdf/1698637.pdf?acceptTC=true
    8. Slovic P. The perception of risk. London: Ea. 2000. 473 p.
    9. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. Why study risk perception? [Internet]. Risk analysis. 1982. p. 83–93. Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1539-6924.1982.tb01369.x/full
    10. Remoundou K, Brennan M, Sacchettini G, Panzone L, Butler-Ellis MC, Capri E, et al. Perceptions of pesticides exposure risks by operators, workers, residents and bystanders in Greece, Italy and the UK. Sci Total Environ [Internet]. 2015 Feb 1 [cited 2015 Jun 25];505:1082–92. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0048969714015605
    11. Blanco A, Sánchez F, Carrera P CA y RD. Supuestos teóricos para un modelo psicosocial de las conductas de riesgo. In: Yubero, S. y Larrañaga E, editor. Sida: Una visión multidisciplinar. España: Universidad Castilla La Mancha; 2000. p. 41–62.
    12. Elkind PD. Perceptions of risk, stressors, and locus of control influence intentions to practice safety behaviors in agriculture. J Agromedicine [Internet]. 2007;12(4):7–25. Available from: http://eds.b.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.unal.edu.co/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=c4f223d3-f725-40d7-80e8-e628b5780b56%40sessionmgr115&vid=4&hid=108
    13. Arezes PM, Miguel AS. Hearing protection use in industry: The role of risk perception. Saf Sci [Internet]. 2005 Apr [cited 2015 Jun 25];43(4):253–67. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925753505000354
    14. Gürcanlı GE, Baradan S, Uzun M. Risk perception of construction equipment operators on construction sites of Turkey. Int J Ind Ergon [Internet]. 2015 Jan [cited 2015 Feb 22];46:59–68. Available from: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169814114001711
    15. Canney P. Seguridad y salud en el trabajo de construcción: El caso Colombia [Internet]. 2000. Available from: http://white.lim.ilo.org/spanish/260ameri/publ/docutrab/dt-129/dt_129.pdf
    16. Slovic P, Fischhoff B, Lichtenstein S. Characterising perceived risk. Perilous progress: Managing the Hazards of Technology. 1985. p. 91–125.
    17. Fischhoff B, Watson SR, Hope C. Defining risk. Policy Sci [Internet]. 1984;17(2):123–39. Available from: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/227182597_Defining_risk
    18. Brun Wibecke. Cognitive components in risk perception: Natural versus manmade risks. J Behav Decis Mak [Internet]. 1992;5(2):117–32. Available from: http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.3960050204/citedby#fn1
    19. ==========================================
    20. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22490/24629448.1709
    Tutorials

    Autors:

    How send article?

    Evaluator pair

    How to evaluate an article?

    Information

    Keywords

    Google Scholar profile

    Is part of
     

    Current Issue

    Sistema OJS 3.4.0.5 - Metabiblioteca |