Measuring Safety Performance

Abstract Partial-interval (PIR), whole-interval (WIR), and momentary time sampling (MTS) estimates were compared against continuous measures of safety performance for three postural behaviors: feet, back, and shoulder position. Twenty-five samples of safety performance across five undergraduate students were scored using a second-by-second continuous recording procedure to calculate actual levels of safety performance. Then 15, 30, 45, 60, and 75 s (seconds) PIR, WIR, and MTS estimates of safety performance were calculated. The results of Analysis 1 show that across all samples, PIR overestimated and WIR underestimated safety performance. MTS both under- and overestimated safety performance, but with substantially smaller errors than both PIR and WIR. Actual levels of safety performance were then categorized into low, moderate and high levels of safety performance for further analysis in Analysis 2. The results demonstrate that as safety performance increases, the degree of WIR underestimation increases across all behaviors, and the degree of PIR overestimation varies across levels of safety and behaviors, the level of safety occurrence did not appear to differentially affect MTS estimates.

[1]  A. Martindale,et al.  TAKING A CLOSER LOOK: TIME SAMPLING AND MEASUREMENT ERROR1 , 1977 .

[2]  B. Sulzer-Azaroff,et al.  Behavior analysis for lasting change , 1991 .

[3]  Raymond G. Miltenberger,et al.  Behavior modification: Principles and procedures, 2nd ed. , 2001 .

[4]  P. Gunter,et al.  Efficacy of Using Momentary Time Samples to Determine On-Task Behavior of Students with Emotional/Behavioral Disorders , 2003 .

[5]  G Murphy,et al.  Measurement error in direct observations: a comparison of common recording methods. , 1980, Behaviour research and therapy.

[6]  Michael Daniels,et al.  The Use of Momentary Time Sampling and Partial Interval Recording in Behavioural Research , 1990 .

[7]  Alex Harrop,et al.  Observer error in the use of momentary time sampling and partial interval recording , 1994 .

[8]  Alan E. Kazdin,et al.  Single-Case Research Designs , 1982 .

[9]  A. Martindale,et al.  An evaluation of time-sample measures of behavior. , 1975, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[10]  Terry E. McSween,et al.  Values-Based Safety Process: Improving Your Safety Culture With Behavior-Based Safety , 1995 .

[11]  Gina Green,et al.  Comparison of direct observational methods for measuring stereotypic behavior in children with autism spectrum disorders. , 2004, Research in developmental disabilities.

[12]  H. De Vroom,et al.  Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) , 2006 .

[13]  R. Miltenberger Behavior Modification: Principles and Procedures , 1996 .

[14]  A Harrop,et al.  Methods of time sampling: A reappraisal of momentary time sampling and partial interval recording. , 1986, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[15]  A. Martindale,et al.  Taking a closer look: time sampling and measurement error. , 1977, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[16]  A. Repp,et al.  A comparison of frequency, interval, and time-sampling methods of data collection. , 1976, Journal of applied behavior analysis.

[17]  H. Pennypacker,et al.  Strategies and tactics of human behavioral research , 1980 .