The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Safety culture: Key theoretical issues
Abstract
The organizational preconditions to major systems failures are seen as increasingly important for risk management. However, existing empirical attempts to study safety culture and its relationship to organizational outcomes have remained fragmented and underspecified in theoretical terms. This is despite the existence of a number of well-developed theories of organizationally induced accidents and disasters. Reasons for this disfunction of theory and practice are first considered. The paper then outlines four key theoretical questions for safety culture researchers: the fact that culture acts simultaneously as a precondition both for safe operations and for the oversight of incubating hazards (the paradox of ‘safety’ culture); the challenge of dealing with complex and ill-structured hazardous situations where decision makers are faced with deep forms of uncertainty represented by incompleteness of knowledge or ignorance; the need to consider the construction of risk perceptions in workgroups, and to view risk acceptability as the outcome of a process of social negotiation; and the fact that institutional politics and power are critical for determining the achievement of safety culture goals, and in particular that of organizational learning.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Reason, J. (1990) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139062367 · Cited by 5,108
Managing the Risks of Organizational Accidents
Reason, J. (2016) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315543543 · Cited by 4,430
The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA.
Rosa, E. A., & Vaughan, D. (1997) · Social Forces · doi:10.2307/2580695 · Cited by 1,631
Organizational Culture as a Source of High Reliability
Weick, K. E. (1987) · California Management Review · doi:10.2307/41165243 · Cited by 1,341
Wildavsky, A. (1990) · The Journal of Risk and Insurance · doi:10.2307/252851 · Cited by 911
The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA.
Sagan, S. D., & Vaughan, D. (1997) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2393926 · Cited by 910
The Organizational and Interorganizational Development of Disasters
Turner, B. A. (1976) · Administrative Science Quarterly · doi:10.2307/2391850 · Cited by 876
Turner, B. A., & Pidgeon, N. (1995) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 872
Self-citationDouglas, P. M. (2002) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203430866 · Cited by 828
Worthington, R. (1982) · American Political Science Review · doi:10.2307/1960465 · Cited by 714
Cited by
Vinodkumar, M. N., & Bhasi, M. (2010) · Accident Analysis & Prevention · doi:10.1016/j.aap.2010.06.021 · Cited by 538
Man-made disasters: why technology and organizations (sometimes) fail
Pidgeon, N., & O'Leary, M. (2000) · Safety Science · doi:10.1016/s0925-7535(00)00004-7 · Cited by 473
Self-citationA cross-validation of safety climate scale using confirmatory factor analytic approach
Seo, D.-C., Torabi, M. R., Blair, E. H., & Ellis, N. T. (2004) · Journal of Safety Research · doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2004.04.006 · Cited by 324
Lund, J., & Aarø, L. E. (2004) · Safety Science · doi:10.1016/s0925-7535(03)00045-6 · Cited by 243
Tear, M. J., Reader, T. W., Shorrock, S., & Kirwan, B. (2020) · Safety Science · doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2018.10.014 · Cited by 116
Metadata
- Authors
- Pidgeon, N.
- Venue
- Work & Stress
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1998-07
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 202-216
- ISSN
- 0267-8373 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-5335
- OpenAlex
- W2076119629
- Cited by
- 309
- References
- 42
- FWCI
- 7.56
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Safety culture: Key theoretical issues. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/02678379808256862
- The paper
- Pidgeon, N. (1998). Safety culture: Key theoretical issues. Work & Stress. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678379808256862
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.