DeepDyve requires Javascript to function. Please enable Javascript on your browser to continue.
A study on the effectiveness of non-verbal teaching materials in construction accidents prevention education: through an International comparative experiment A study on the effectiveness of non-verbal teaching materials in construction accidents...
Zi Yi, Tan; Shide, Kazuya; Kanisawa, Hirotake; Mine, Naoto; Otsu, Kazuki; Koga, Yohei; Someya, Shunsuke
2023-03-31 00:00:00
JOURNAL OF ASIAN ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING ENGINEERING https://doi.org/10.1080/13467581.2023.2193611 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT A study on the effectiveness of non-verbal teaching materials in construction accidents prevention education: through an International comparative experiment a,b b b c b b Tan Zi Yi , Kazuya Shide , Hirotake Kanisawa , Naoto Mine , Kazuki Otsu , Yohei Koga and Shunsuke Someya a b Faculty of Engineering and Green Technology, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Perak, Malaysia; Department of Architecture, Shibaura Institute of Technology (SIT), Tokyo, Japan; SIT Research Laboratories, Shibaura Institute of Technology (SIT), Tokyo, Japan ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY Received 19 July 2022 Safety is a top priority in the construction industry; therefore, safety training is essential to Accepted 17 March 2023 prevent construction casualties as the employment of foreign and young workers on construc- tion sites worldwide increases. More studies are necessary to identify the effective training KEYWORDS methods among novices and foreign workers. To address the gap, a rigorous comparative Non-verbalized safety study of verbal and non-verbalized materials from two different countries was conducted. training; construction safety; Statistically significant differences were found between nationalities in non-verbal materials construction novices; foreign due to different safety culture and background, and insignificant differences were found workers between both safety training materials with the same nationality. By comparing the outcomes of both training materials, the non-verbalized materials work effectively among the construc- tion novices to provide visual aid to relate similar attitudes like technical trainees to the scenarios even without field experiences. The non-verbalized materials provide an alternative to passive learning methods to enhance the other safety training activities in the construction industry. The findings provide an initial stage for creating effective teaching materials that can be generally applied in other countries to capture the issues by a heterogeneous workforce personalized to suit the scenario of each country for better outcomes. 1. Introduction (Cheng and Wu 2013) and Malaysia (Department of Safety is one of the basic human rights based on the Occupational Safety and Health DOSH 2016). In devel- Work Human Rights Declaration (United Nations 2022), oping country such as Malaysia is encountered about especially in the workplace. Construction industry is 70% of construction foreign labours mainly from regarded as one of the unsafe occupational fields Indonesia and Bangladesh legal and illegal (Abdul- with complex work environment (Fang and Wu 2013) Rahman et al. 2012) and the unskilled foreign workers and depends on foreign labor workforce (Ismail et al. is the weakness in exchange of cheaper workforce 2018) in many countries. It contributed a high rate of (Ismail et al. 2018). 30% of fatal accidents (International Labor Each country has its own culture and customs; it is Organization ILO 2021) where the construction work- important to implement safety education in the receiv- ers are 3 times more likely than other workers to die ing country to improve workers’ ability in risk recogni- from the occupational related accidents (ILO 2015). tion (Cheng and Wu 2013). Many countries in Most of the construction accidents occur among Southeast Asia have systems for safety supervision at foreign workers and young workers (Ajslev et al. 2017) construction sites, but have not developed regulations due to language barriers (Oswald et al. 2019) and lack of for safety training at these sites. Japan is one of the few safety training (Priyadarshani, Karunasena, and countries that impose an obligation on general con- Jayasuriya 2013). In other words, construction workers tractors to provide ongoing safety education and train- decide how works jeopardize with their ability to iden- ing for construction technicians working in the tify potential accidents on construction sites that leads country, and the safety educational content is well- to accidents. Studies showed the fatal accident rate for developed. In Japan, the safety and health education foreign workers is two times higher than domestic must be conducted by the construction companies workers in many countries such as Japan, Taiwan when engaging workers and it is mandatory to provide CONTACT Tan Zi Yi iyiz_.224@hotmail.com; tanzy@utar.edu.my Faculty of Engineering and Green Technology, Universiti Tunku Abdul Rahman, Perak, Malaysia © 2023 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group on behalf of the Architectural Institute of Japan, Architectural Institute of Korea and Architectural Society of China. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or with their consent. 2 T. ZI YI ET AL. said education without delay when there are changes that safety training is the effective method to educate of workers in the construction sites. The safety training and change the worker’s behaviours towards construc- for all the contractor’s personnel provided by the con- tion safety issues to reduce the construction accidents tractors must be designed in a language which the (Jaafar et al. 2017; Winge, Albrechtsen, and Mostue persons to be trained fully understand as appropriate 2019; Casey et al. 2021; Vignoli et al. 2021; Wang, (clause 1.19 in Japan International Cooperation Agency Jiang, and Blackman 2021) especially before and dur- Standard Safety Specification) (JICA 2021). Japan ing the construction phases (Esmaeili and Hallowell enforced the Occupational Safety and health (OSH) 2012). multilingual teaching material and non-verbal OSH The key element of safety training was to improve teaching materials for workers and foreign workers to the communication skills via verbal, non-verbal and promote safety training on site. The employers are cross-cultural to establish the effective safety training obligated to provide safety and health education among the workers (Jeschke et al. 2017). Safety train- related to construction to all workers including new ing is often mandated by regulators and contractors, workers and foreign workers stated in the Article 59 of which might limit the sense of choice for the construc- Industrial Safety and Health Act (1972). tion workers (Casey et al. 2021). With the involvement For instance, the construction accident rate* was of heterogeneous workforce in construction industry, recorded 6.27 in 2000 and reduced to 4.48 in 2020; in particular, the language barriers experienced by the construction fatalities recorded 34% or 8,964 out of foreign workers, low education level (Arif et al. 2021) 26,104 total fatality cases caused construction workers and differences in customs (Baseline Survey died at construction sites between 2000 and 2020 in Construction Report 2015) regarding construction site Japan (OSH Statistics in Japan 2020). The construction safety are significant challenges with learning in safety industry in Japan owns about 3.48% of foreign workers training. in 2019 among the total number of employees in the Besides, on a multilingual and multicultural con- industry and most of the foreign workers are from struction site, the workers are unable to rely on Southeast Asia. The construction accident rate is a shared verbal language especially during the safety declined in Japan prove that the effectiveness of the training (Oswald et al. 2019). Differences in customs safety education among foreign workers in Japan cause workers on the same construction sites speak which turns into a textbook for developed and devel- different languages, which can lead to different under- oping countries. standing of the safety training that the workers must However, there is a dearth of insight of the different attend, and the foreign workers often work with peo- nationalities workers’ safety performance after the ver- ple from the same cultural background which hinders balized materials of safety training. There are limita- the learning of the safety norms, regulations and lan- tions of study focus on the safety training materials guage of the host country (Al-Bayati et al. 2017). Many used in construction for workers with different charac- foreign workers employed in the construction industry teristics and approaches, and how effectives of the have problems in understanding safe work procedures safety training materials can be applied to different and instructions due to language issue (Dai and nationalities. Therefore, this study aims to identify, Goodrum 2011; Cheng and Wu 2013; Demirkesen and which materials can be worked effectively regardless Arditi 2015; Ismail et al. 2018). Therefore, how to effec - the nationalities by comparing the differences atti- tively provide workers from multinational with consis- tudes of construction novices and workers who experi- tent safety knowledge and training has become ences the verbal and non-verbal safety materials. Three a challenge. objectives were formed to achieve the aim: 1.2. Safety training methods (1) to determine the differences attitudes in inex- perienced personnel between Japanese and for- The safety training methods such as lecture (Başağa eign workers, et al. 2018), toolbox training (Jeschke et al. 2017), and (2) to investigate the attitudes among different audio-visual materials (Blanchard and Simmering nationalities in non-verbal materials and 2014) able to provide better explained on the hazards (3) to find out the differences between verbal and to reduce the accident rate by improved the workers’ non-verbal materials in construction safety knowledge acquisition and behaviour alteration (Gao, training contents. Gonzalez, and Yiu 2019) by the use of listening, visual and reading, and the learning outcomes are based on individuals, varies. Some researchers considered the traditional safety 1.1. Construction safety training training is not an ideal solution for construction work- Safety training is widely used intervention for prevent- ers (Guo, Yu, and Skitmore 2017) when compared with ing occupational injuries at work. Studies have showed more intensive forms of instruction (Burke et al. 2011), JOURNAL OF ASIAN ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING ENGINEERING 3 yet, these approaches were implemented in most of obtained through a set of questions to determine if the countries as construction companies’ restraint there are significant differences among the groups safety budget for high-tech safety training based on the verbal and non-verbal materials. The (Mohammadi, Tavakolan, and Khosravi 2018), since it experimental design including the overview of the is sufficient to enhance the basic safety knowledge experiment, rationale of selected safety training mate- among the workers effectively with statistical evidence rials, questions design and data analysis are explained (Gao, Gonzalez, and Yiu 2019). in the following sections. Proper safety training with lecture able to improve The human behaviour is significantly influenced by the fall safety knowledge, risk perceptions, compre- safety culture, and the safety culture can be divided hensive safety and safety culture on worksite by the into three levels ascending as PPE, operation proce- workers (Forst et al. 2013; Evanoff et al. 2016). The BLR dures and safety concepts (Cheng and Wu 2013). (2014) report suggest using more visual aids in safety Therefore, the selected training contents were based training sessions could provide benefits of being self- on the most occurring accident types reported in paced. Learners are involved in a passive method with DOSH and JISHA as these contents are related to the the given instruction and information, therefore, unsafe working behaviour, unsafe working procedure, proper safety training suits to construction sites cul- and unsafe site condition that mentioned earlier in the tures is necessary to conduct for the construction studies. The non-verbalized videos made by Planex, workers regularly to enhance the safety knowledge. Japan was used in this experiment. The video is The visual aids able to sustain the workers’ interests designed to help to understand what you are allowed and attention to solve the language problems during to do, what you are not allowed to do, and why you are the training sessions to improve safety training not allowed to do it. The video content included: (Demirkesen and Arditi 2015; Guo, Yu, and Skitmore proper attire, wearing a helmet properly, wearing 2017). The non-verbalized content with related safety a body belt-type safety belt properly, cutter work, up- contents as part of the safety training methods used in and-down work, keeping things tidy, slinging a sling, construction industry resulted in better knowledge wearing a full harness-type safety belt properly, and transfer, especially when the video-based learning using portable work platform. with a conclusion and slight humor able to provide The video content demonstrated a series of safe better understanding and clarity to teach the non- behaviours; consequences of unsafe behaviours and native speaking workers (Arif et al. 2021). Many types how to prevent the consequences caused by unsafe of safety training involved visual-aid approaches have behaviours. For instance, the video shows the right been introduced to promote the construction safety way to use PPE and tools on site, what injuries can issues (Li et al. 2018; Ahn et al. 2020; Nykänen et al. result from incorrect PPE application and tool use, and 2020; Zujovic et al. 2021). Previous study revealed that how to prevent such injuries on sites through safe the less information-dense and visualized training behaviours. The impressions between the construction materials such as videos with graphics performed the novices and foreign workers in Japan and Malaysia best at stimulating learning across age groups (Wallen after watching the video were observed, to determine and Mulloy 2006). whether there are any differences in impressions between the construction novices and foreign workers regardless of nationality. 1.3. Research methodology In addition, a total of 60 questions were designed and developed by using the content produced by From the previous research above, what we can under- Planex, Japan as reference. The questions equally set stand is that language, culture, and tools go hand in for three sections, first section covers issues related to hand to effectively implement safety education. In PPE; the second section covers issues related to work- particular, we are interested in whether useful safety ing at height and use of tools, the third section covers education content developed in one country would be issues related to lifting operations and site cleanliness. useful in another country. Therefore, this study aims to Each sections solicits two sub-sections namely general identify the characteristics of non-verbal safety teach- knowledge (5 questions) in multiple choices questions ing materials experienced by the construction novices to check the baseline of the measurement; and the and foreign workers in Japan and Malaysia with the use rationale to select the 7-points Likert-scale measure- of Japanese construction safety education materials. ment (1 = Strongly Disagree, 7 = Strongly Agree) for The performance of safety using non-verbalized mate- the scenario questions (15 questions) to check the rials was investigated through a comparative experi- impact of content on impression ratings from the ment among different nationalities of construction participants. workers and novices who works in Japan and The general knowledge questions were compulsory Malaysia construction sites. The Japanese safety train- to examine differences in initial understanding ing material with same contents was applied in the towards safety training among all the respondents to experiment. The respondents’ performances were 4 T. ZI YI ET AL. accurately measure the outcomes of the experiment; received the training materials through an online plat- while the scenario questions were designed according form with the given access link. The foreign workers in to the real situations to determine the respondents’ Malaysia only available in non-verbalized materials due attitudes towards different scenarios on site. Most of to low literacy level, therefore, the test for this group the scenario questions were not reflected directly dur- was conducted by reading the questions to receive ing the training sessions, therefore the attitudes on response from all the foreign workers. how will the respondents react and respond to the The group comparison of both training materials situations in construction sites can be tackled through arranged in three ways namely: inexperienced person- the Likert-scale measurement. All the questions were nel between Japanese and non-Japanese in Japan prepared in multi-languages setting namely English, (JPA2-JPA3 and JPB2-JPB3); the non-verbalized mate- Japanese, Bahasa Malaysia and Vietnamese to suit all rial between nationalities (JPB1-MYB1 and JPB3-MYB3) the respondents to eliminate the languages issue. and the verbal and non-verbal materials among the groups (JPA1-JPB1, JPA2-JPB2, JPA3-JPB3 and MYA1- MYB1) to reflect the research objectives. Figure 1 indi- 1.4. Experimental design cated the process of the experiment. The entire experi- ment process takes about an hour for each sub-groups. 1.4.1. Overview of the experiment A total number of 291 participants including 65 Malaysian undergraduates (taking courses in 1.5. Data analysis Construction Management), 71 Japanese undergradu- ates (taking courses in Project Management for Two major dimensions were defined to compare the Building Construction), 68 Japanese postgraduates training effectiveness between verbal and non-verbal (Architecture and Architectural Engineering course), training namely safety knowledge baseline measure- 27 foreign workers (Indonesians) in Malaysia and 60 ment and evaluation of attitudes towards circum- foreign technical trainees (Vietnamese) in Japan. The stances. The safety knowledge baseline measurement selected undergraduates possessed similar degree in was measured through the score points obtained from the same field that generate a similar crowd, and the respondents; while the evaluation of attitudes was received construction safety related lectures respec- measured through the traditional scale measurement. tively in their universities. Therefore, we believe that Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) 16.0 the comparability is reasonable. The selected construc- was used to perform the Mann–Whitney U test in order tion foreign technical trainees in Japan with less than to determine if the differences between the groups are three years of working experiences; and foreign work- statistically significant at p-value less than 0.05. The ers in Malaysia with at least 5 years of working experi- data were analysed by nonparametric tests, Mann– ences in construction industry. All the construction Whitney U Test as it is more suitable for skewed dis- companies will be anonymous due to private and tributions or data with discrete or ordinal scale confidential. (Krzywinski and Altman 2014), to determine whether The participants were categorized into two main or not there is any significant differences in the mean groups to received same training contents prepared scores between the groups by both training materials. in different materials (Table 1). Sub-group A receives As the nonparametric statistical analysis, Mann– verbalized material (photos and texts); Sub-group Whitney U test ranks all the values ascending with B receives the non-verbalized materials (no subtitle a p-value to measure the discrepancy between mean provided). The participants received the safety training ranks between two studies groups (GraphPad 2022). contents categorized into three sections (Table 2) via The smaller the p-value would suggest a more signifi - online platforms such as Zoom/Microsoft Teams etc. cant difference between the two experimental groups. handled by the instructors in Japan and Malaysia It was assumed that if there were no significant differ - respectively. The participants were requested to ences, the content would be expected to have the response a set of test questions via Google form after same effect or not between the two countries, Table 1. Description of sample data. Japanese (JP) Malaysian (MY) N % Verbal group A1 BSc students 36 33 69 51 A2 Postgraduates 35 - 35 26 A3 Foreign workers 30 - 30 22 total 101 33 134 100 Non-verbal group B1 BSc students 35 32 67 43 B2 Postgraduates 33 - 33 21 B3 Foreign Workers 30 27 57 36 total 98 59 157 100 JOURNAL OF ASIAN ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING ENGINEERING 5 Table 2. Safety training contents. 1.6.2. Section 1: Personnel Protective Equipment Safety training contents Section (PPE) Way to wear PPE 1 Personal Protective Majority of the respondents answered all questions Way to wear safety helmet Equipment (PPE) correctly in PPE section except question S1–2; pre- Wearing method of moon belt type of safety belt cisely, about half of the undergraduates from the ver- Wearing of full harness type of bal group answered wrongly for the safer materials for safety belt Way to use pipe cutter 2 Work at height and correct work gloves as they do not experience hands-on activ- Way to use cutting tools way to use tools ities such as cutting board on sites, therefore, this Work at height (portable workbench) might be the reason why the answers were varied. Up and down work Housekeeping on site 3 Lifting operation and site Lifting operation on site (sling) cleanliness 1.6.3. Section 2: work at height Most of the students scored less satisfied for the sec- tion of “work at height”, especially to the question conversely, if there were significant differences, the “What is the most appropriate height for the hook of content would be suggested the need to account for the safety belt?”, 74% from verbal groups, 80% from cultural differences. non-verbal groups answered “height between waist and chest”, where the correct answer is “as high as possible”. However, the test score obtained from the 1.6. Discussion on the findings construction workers were slightly higher as they own related experiences on site. Nevertheless, all the 1.6.1. General knowledge respondents who undergone non-verbalized materials First, the average test score points under the safety were scored higher than verbalized materials in this knowledge sections (15 questions in total) were eval- section. uated based on the correct answers obtained from each of the groups after the training. The Mann– Whitney U test was conducted for pairwise comparison 1.6.4. Section 3: lifting operation and site among four groups. The results showed no significant cleanliness differences in the overall safety knowledge among The average scored points for “lifting operation and most of the groups in verbal and non-verbal materials, site cleanliness” were generally higher than the other except for Japanese undergraduates of both materials sections especially Japanese undergraduates scored for 2 sections, however, the score points obtained from 4.89 under non-verbal group; yet, Japanese postgrad- this group in both materials were the second after uates and technical trainees scored slightly higher for Japanese postgraduates. In term of scored points, the verbalized than non-verbalized materials. Only 60% of non-verbal material tends to work better for under- the Malaysian undergraduates and foreign workers graduates; while verbal material tends to work better answered correctly for the question S3–5 (Table 3), in inexperienced personnel between Japanese and where this might due to the Malaysian undergraduates non-Japanese in Japan. The statistical analysis provides do not have such experiences and the foreign con- detailed information of each groups for three sections struction workers do not perform such practices in as shown in Table 3. Malaysian construction sites. Group Sub-group Safety Assessment Training JPA1 Verbal Verbal JPA2 (A) materials Test Section 1-3 JPA3 questions after each MYA1 Non- section of Verbal (B) safety JPB1 training JPB2 Non-verbal JPB3 materials Briefing session Section 1-3 on the experiment MYB1 to each group MYB3 respectively Figure 1. Process of the safety training and assessments by groups. 6 T. ZI YI ET AL. Table 3. Test scores for general knowledge among all groups. Questions JPA1 JPB1 JPA2 JPB2 JPA3 JPB3 MYA1 MYB1 MYB3 Code Section 1: Personal Protective Equipment S1–1 Which is the safest way to wear a helmet? 86 89 89 88 90 83 88 91 93 S1–2 Which is the safest material for work gloves? 56 74 77 70 53 63 33 50 74 S1–3 Which of the following is the most appropriate footwear for use during 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 construction? S1–4 What is the most inappropriate clothing to wear while working? 92 91 97 94 97 87 88 94 82 S1–5 When is it not necessary to wear a safety helmet on site? 97 100 100 100 100 93 100 97 82 Average score points (x 5) 4.31 4.54 4.63 4.52 4.43 4.27 4.09 4.31 4.3 Mann–Whitney U Test (p-value<0.05) NS NS NS NS n.a. Section 2: Work at Height S2–1 Which of the following is the most inappropriate precaution to take when 69 86 60 79 57 60 55 56 67 working on and under scaffolding? S2–2 Which of the following is the most inappropriate action to take when you notice 64 77 66 64 67 80 58 63 82 that a scaffold member has come loose S2–3 Which is the most appropriate procedure for unloading a load after working on 97 100 97 97 90 77 70 78 74 a workbench? S2–4 Which of the following is the most inappropriate when working on scaffolding? 94 100 97 91 83 90 73 84 63 S2–5 What is the most appropriate height for the hook of the safety belt? 3 0 0 0 83 67 3 3 93 Average score points (x 5) 3.28 3.63 3.26 3.30 3.03 3.33 2.58 2.84 3.78 Mann–Whitney U Test (p-value<0.05) * NS NS NS n.a. Section 3: Lifting Operation and Site Cleanliness S3–1 Which is the most inappropriate behaviour in lifting operations? 75 91 89 100 70 70 82 72 85 S3–2 Which of the following is the most inappropriate way to give instructions to 83 97 94 91 100 97 97 97 82 a crane operator? S3–3 Which of the following is the most inappropriate reason for keeping the work 92 100 91 79 90 93 91 94 93 area clean? S3–4 Who is responsible for keeping the work area tidy? 97 100 100 97 100 97 97 94 100 S3–5 Which of the following is most inappropriate in relation to safety passages on 97 100 100 100 93 90 61 63 59 site? Average score points (x 5) 4.44 4.89 4.74 4.67 4.53 4.47 4.27 4.19 4.00 Mann–Whitney U Test (p-value<0.05) * NS NS NS n.a. Result indicators, NS = No significance, ”*‘ represent p value<0.05, ’**” represent p value<0.001, n.a.=not applicable. mean scores between verbalized and non-verbalized 1.6.5. Summary of general knowledge after both materials among four groups to find out differences in training materials attitudes towards the scenarios on construction site The results indicated no significant differences in inex- based on different nationalities. The overall significant perienced personnel between Japanese and non- differences between both training materials among Japanese in both training materials, yet, the postgrad- four groups were shown in Table 4. The discussion uates scored higher points than foreign trainee in both will be based on the set objectives with the smallest training materials which might due to different educa- p-value as statistically highly significant differences. tion background and safety culture. The scored points from Japanese undergraduates, postgraduates and technical trainees were similar and it indicates that 1.7.1. Objective 1: differences of attitudes between they own a standardized level of understanding Japanese and foreigner by inexperienced personnel towards the safety knowledge compared to in Japan for verbal and non-verbal safety training Malaysian undergraduates who performed less satis- materials fied in both training materials. Statistically significant There are significant differences in three questions differences between Japanese and Malaysian under- from two sections (PPE and correct way to use tools) graduates for 2 sections in non-verbalized materials for verbal materials and only one question with signif- (work at height, p < 0.05; lifting operation and site icant differences in non-verbal materials among the cleanliness, p < 0.001), but the scored points of all sec- two experimental groups due to different opinions by tions in non-verbal materials are higher than verbal the inexperienced personnel in Japan (Table 5). materials for both undergraduates’ groups. The foreign The differences in attitudes towards these questions workers in Malaysia performed moderately in the non- were presented in Figures 2–5. For instance, almost all verbal material among all the groups as they own field the Japanese postgraduates and about half of the experiences, which is slightly different from Japanese. technical trainees “strongly disagree” to “Only careless- The next session will be furthered discuss on the atti- ness can cause injuries when cutting boards with cut- tudes towards scenario questions by groups. ters”; while 37% of technical trainees considered carelessness is the major concern to cause injuries (S1–11). Besides, 77% of Japanese postgraduates and 1.7. Attitudes towards construction sites all the technical trainees “strongly disagree” to situational questions “I hooked my safety belt on the same rope as the worker The obtained data were undergone Mann–Whitney next to me” (S2–16). Furthermore, about 46% of U test to determine the significant differences of Japanese postgraduates and 80% of technical trainees JOURNAL OF ASIAN ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING ENGINEERING 7 Table 4. Differences between verbalized and non-verbalized materials by groups. 1 2 3 JPA2- JPB2- JPB1- JPB3- JPA1- JPA2- JPA3- MYA1- Code Comparative Analysis A3 B3 MYB1 MYB3 B1 B2 B3 B1 Section 1: PPE S1–6 Safety helmets are useless in case of a fall NS * NS NS NS NS NS NS S1–7 It is safer to wear a helmet with a towel wrapped around your head. NS * NS * NS * NS NS S1–8 Helmet chinstrap should be left loose. NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS S1–9 No more crashes from scaffolding simply by wearing a safety belt. NS NS ** NS NS NS NS NS S1–10 It is safer to wear cotton gloves when cutting the materials. * NS NS NS * NS NS NS S1–11 Only carelessness can cause injuries when cutting boards with cutters. ** NS ** * NS * NS NS S1–12 You may wear sandals when working, as long as you are not working on the NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS scaffold. S1–13 It is alright to wear short trousers when working on the interior. * NS * ** * NS NS NS S1–14 The height at which the safety belt hooks should be attached as low as NS NS * * * NS NS NS possible. S1–15 Full harness fastenings are safer when attached to the chest. NS NS NS ** NS NS NS NS S1–16 When cutting pipes, it is safe to do so without the use of special tools. NS NS NS ** NS * NS NS S1–17 No matter how hot it is, you should wear long sleeves on construction sites. NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS S1–18 If you sweat a lot, it is good to work with a towel around your necks. NS NS * ** NS * NS NS S1–19 Wearing socks can help to prevent injury. NS * * ** NS NS NS NS S1–20 Never work with the chin strap of the helmet unfastened. NS NS NS * NS NS NS NS Section 2: Work at Height S2–6 You may start work even if there is a worker under you on the scaffold. NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS S2–7 It is safe to move the workbench without folding it. * * NS ** * NS NS NS S2–8 There is a risk of falling if you step off the workbench while carrying a load in NS NS * * NS NS NS NS one hand. S2–9 It is safe to work on the scaffold without hooking the safety belt. * NS NS ** NS NS NS NS S2–10 The hook of the safety belt should be hooked at a height below the waist. NS NS * * * NS * NS S2–11 It is dangerous to work on the edge of the workbench. NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS S2–12 In scaffold assembly work, it is not necessary to hook up safety belts if you are NS NS NS ** NS NS NS NS only moving on the scaffold. S2–13 Cutters need to be used on a stable platform. NS NS * * NS NS NS NS S2–14 You should not wear a leather gloves when cutting boards with a cutter. NS NS ** NS * NS NS NS S2–15 It is dangerous to use power tools while carrying out other tasks. NS NS * NS NS * NS NS S2–16 I hooked my safety belt on the same rope as the worker next to me. ** * NS NS NS NS * NS S2–17 It is better to use a full harness safety belt when working at height. NS NS NS NS NS NS * NS S2–18 The use of specialist tools can help to prevent injury. ** ** ** NS NS NS NS NS S2–19 The end of the workbench must be fitted with a stopper to prevent falling * NS NS * NS NS NS NS from height. S2–20 If it is low enough, even a small crash can kill you. NS NS * * NS NS NS NS Section 3: Lifting Operation and Site Cleanliness S3–6 Tidiness on the construction site helps to prevent accidents. NS NS NS * NS NS NS NS S3–7 After using machines and tools, the user is responsible for cleaning up. NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS S3–8 It is a waste of time to clean your work area afterwards. NS NS NS ** NS NS NS NS S3–9 It is best to stay as close to the load as possible when lifting. NS NS NS * NS NS NS NS S3–10 Lifting operations should be carried out by experienced workers if possible. NS * NS NS NS NS NS NS S3–11 It is safe to work near to the construction machinery. * NS NS * NS NS NS NS S3–12 Work can be done more efficiently when the work area is tidy and organized. * NS NS NS NS * NS NS S3–13 Materials and tools are stored in an organized way and it can be searched NS NS NS NS NS * NS NS efficiently. S3–14 If the work area is dirty, it is easy to trip over it when working. * NS NS NS NS * NS NS S3–15 Materials stored in the safety corridor can lead to injury. NS NS ** * NS NS NS NS S3–16 The area around the construction machinery at work should be off-limits. NS * NS NS NS NS NS NS S3–17 The wire rope should be checked for damage before lifting operations are NS NS NS NS NS * NS NS carried out. S3–18 Even if you have to work in the same place tomorrow, you should clean your NS NS NS ** NS NS NS NS work area afterwards. S3–19 When unloading with a crane, it is better to stay close to the load. NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS S3–20 When unloading with a crane, it is not dangerous to hold the crane by hand NS NS NS NS NS NS NS NS when it shakes if it is in a low position. Results indicator, *p-value<0.05, ** p-value<0.001, NS=no significance “strongly agree” to “the use of special tools can help to questions; and significant differences between foreign prevent injury” (S2–18) in verbal materials; 57% of technical trainees and foreign workers in Japan and Japanese postgraduates and 80% of technical trainees Malaysia for ten questions. Table 6 showed the sce- “strongly agree” to this scenario in non-verbal nario questions found significant differences between materials. the groups under three sections. The attitudes towards the scenarios were slightly different among the experi- mental groups. The discussion begins with undergrad- 1.7.2. Objective 2: differences between nationalities uates then followed by foreign workers. These in non-verbal material questions will be presented in Figures 6 and 7 to There were significant differences found between show the differences of attitudes by the respondents. Japanese and Malaysian undergraduates for five 8 T. ZI YI ET AL. Table 5. Differences of inexperienced persons in Japan for The use of specialist tools can help to both training groups. prevent injury Verbal groups Non-verbal groups JPA2-A3 (N = 65) JPB2-B3 (N = 63) Training group Mann–Whitney U test Code Z value p value Code Z value p value JPA2 (N=35) S1–11 −4.166 0.000** S2–18 −3.533 0.000** JPA3 (N=30) S2–16 −3.675 0.000** S2–18 −3.832 0.000** ** denoted p value lower than 0.001 representing a significant difference between the two groups. Only carelessness can cause injuries when cutting boards with cutters 2 2 2 1 1 1 Strongly Disagree Neutral Strongly Agree JPA2 (N=35) Figure 4. (Left to right, top to bottom): Responses from the inexperienced personnel in verbal materials (Figure 2–4), and JPA3 (N=30) non-verbal materials (Figure 5). The use of specialist tools can help to prevent injury 9 30 JPB2 (N=33) 2 2 2 2 JPB3 (N=30) Strongly Disagree Neutral Strongly Agree Figure 2. (Left to right, top to bottom): Responses from the inexperienced personnel in verbal materials (Figure 2–4), and non-verbal materials (Figure 5). 10 8 5 3 2 2 2 2 I hooked my safety belt on the same rope 1 1 as the worker next to me Strongly Disagree Neutral Strongly Agree Figure 5. (Left to right, top to bottom): Responses from the inexperienced personnel in verbal materials (Figure 2–4), and JPA2 (N=35) non-verbal materials (Figure 5). JPA3 (N=30) The attitudes of the undergraduates from Japan and Malaysia are somehow different towards the concept of unsafe actions on site. For instant, about 80% of the Japanese students and 41% of Malaysian students “strongly disagree” to “No more crashes from scaffold - 5 ing simply by wearing a safety belt”; 6% of Japanese 2 2 students and 38% of Malaysian students agreed to the statement (S1–9). About 83% of the Japanese students Strongly Disagree Neutral Strongly Agree and 47% of Malaysian students disagreed that care- lessness is the only cause to injuries when cutting Figure 3. (Left to right, top to bottom): Responses from the boards with cutters, yet, 28% of Malaysian students inexperienced personnel in verbal materials (Figure 2–4), and non-verbal materials (Figure 5). agreed to this situation (S1–11). Furthermore, 94% of No. of respondents No. of respondents No. of respondents No. of respondents JOURNAL OF ASIAN ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING ENGINEERING 9 Table 6. Differences between nationalities in non-verbal materials. Non-verbal groups JPB1-MYB1 (N = 67) JPB3-MYB3 (N = 57) Training group Mann–Whitney U test Code Z value p value Code Z value p value S1–9 −3.845 0.000** S1–13 −3.912 0.000** S1–11 −4.221 0.000** S1–15 −3.831 0.000** S2–14 −4.108 0.000** S1–16 −3.703 0.000** S2–18 −4.183 0.000** S1–18 −4.187 0.000** S3–15 −4.337 0.000** S1–19 −3.508 0.000** S2–7 −3.91 0.000** S2–9 −4.69 0.000** S2–12 −6.173 0.000** S3–8 −6.304 0.000** S3–18 −4.47 0.000** ** denoted p value lower than 0.001 representing a significant difference between the two groups. 100% 2 2 5 5 2 2 90% 80% 4 2 70% 60% 6 6 50% 6 1 1 5 1 3 40% 3 1 23 1 30% 20% 13 10 11 4 8 6 10% 1 1 0% JPB1 MYB1 JPB1 MYB1 JPB1 MYB1 JPB1 MYB1 JPB1 MYB1 S1-9 S1-11 S2-14 S2-18 S3-15 Strongly Disagree Disagree Somewhat disagree Neutral Somewhat agree Agree Strongly Agree Figure 6. Responses from the undergraduates in Japan and Malaysia. (questions from Section 1 to Section 3, left to right). the Japanese students and 59% of Malaysian students The findings discovered the different attitudes “strongly disagree” to “You should not wear a leather between the foreign workers who works in Malaysia gloves when cutting boards with a cutter”; 25% of and technical trainees who works in Japan. For instant, Malaysian students “strongly agree” to this situation about 52% of foreign workers answered “strongly (S2–14). About 43% of the Japanese students dis- agree” to “It is alright to wear short trousers when work- agreed “the use of special tools can help to prevent ing on the interiors” while only one technical trainee injury”; while 40% of Japanese students and 97% of answered the same way; 89% of foreign workers and Malaysia students agreed to this situation (S2–18). 27% of technical trainees answered “strongly agree” to Besides, all the Japanese students agreed that the “If you sweat a lot, it is good to work with a towel around materials stored in the safety corridor can lead to your neck”. Under Section 2, foreign workers showed injury, while 63% of Malaysian students agreed to this unsafe practices towards work at height where 67% situation (S3–15). and 89% of them answered “strongly agree” to “It is 10 T. ZI YI ET AL. 100% 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 90% 2 1 3 80% 15 15 70% 60% 24 24 2 24 50% 27 29 26 26 1 1 25 25 40% 30% 14 14 20% 11 11 10% 1 3 3 1 1 0% S1-13 S1-15 S1-16 S1-18 S1-19 S2-7 S2-9 S2-12 S3-8 S3-18 Strongly Agree Agree Somewhat agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree Figure 7. Responses from the foreign workers in Japan and Malaysia. (questions from Section 1 to Section 3, left to right). safe to work on the scaffold without hooking the safety 1.8. Summary of discussions belt” and “In scaffolding assembly work, it is not neces- The above discussions focused on the objectives to sary to hook up safety belts if you are only moving the discover: (1) Differences between Japanese and non- scaffold ” respectively; while most of the technical trai- Japanese inexperienced personnel in Japan, (2) nees answered “strongly disagree” to both questions. Differences between non-verbal materials among Under Section 3, majority of the foreign workers’ nationalities, and (3) Differences between verbal and responses “strongly agree” to “It is a waste of time to non-verbal materials. clean your work area afterwards” even have to work in First, no significant differences can be identified the same place for tomorrow; while almost all the between Japanese postgraduates and foreign techni- technical trainees answered oppositely. cal trainees in Japan for either verbal or non-verbal materials, in particular, it can be assumed that there 1.7.3. Objective 3: differences between verbal and are no differences in non-verbal materials. The statis- non-verbal materials by groups tical analysis found no significant differences among The difference between Japanese undergraduates, most of the scenario questions between the Japanese postgraduates and foreign technical trainees in both postgraduates and the technical trainees in verbal and training materials were found significant differences (p non-verbal materials, it can be specified that most of value<0.05) in different scenario questions. Table 7 the inexperienced personnel own similar safety knowl- showed the differences between verbal and non- edge and attitudes towards the importance of PPE, verbal materials among individual groups. Six ques- work at height, the correct way to use tools, lifting tions were found significant differences under PPE, operation and site cleanliness in construction sites work at height and correct way to use tools among regardless the training materials. The first objective Japanese undergraduates; nine questions were found was achieved as no differences in perceptions of safety significant differences under three sections among and health using non-verbal materials between inex- Japanese postgraduates; and three questions were perienced persons in Japan could be identified. found significant differences under work at height Second, statistical evidence was found in the non- among the foreign technical trainees. Malaysian under- verbal material showing a significant difference in atti- graduates and foreign workers in Malaysia had no tudes towards the scenario questions between significant differences found in scenario questions for Japanese and Malaysian undergraduates; also the for- both training materials. eign workers who works in Japan and Malaysia. JPB3 MYB3 JPB3 MYB3 JPB3 MYB3 JPB3 MYB3 JPB3 MYB3 JPB3 MYB3 JPB3 MYB3 JPB3 MYB3 JPB3 MYB3 JPB3 MYB3 JOURNAL OF ASIAN ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING ENGINEERING 11 Table 7. Differences between verbal and non-verbal materials. Verbal and Non-verbal groups JPA1-B1 (N = 71) JPA2-B2 (N = 68) JPA3-B3 (N = 60) Training group Mann–Whitney U test Code Z value p value Code Z value p value Code Z value p value S1–10 −2.664 0.008 S1–7 −2.626 0.009 S2–10 −2.167 0.030 S1–13 −2.016 0.044 S1–11 −2.778 0.005 S2–16 −2.051 0.040 S1–14 −2.805 0.005 S1–16 −2.901 0.004 S2–17 −2.051 0.040 S2–7 −2.073 0.038 S1–19 −2.487 0.013 S2–10 −2.858 0.004 S2–15 −2.327 0.02 S2–14 −2.536 0.011 S3–12 −2.107 0.035 S3–13 −2.107 0.035 S3–14 −2.095 0.036 S3–17 −2.107 0.035 Japanese students showed similar attitudes among produced in Japan, it can be assumed that the more themselves towards most of the scenario questions, it safety and health knowledge Japanese people know can be claimed that they own standard safety knowl- about, the easier it will be to understand if it is pre- edge towards unsafe actions within the safety training sented clearly in language. It can be interpreted that contents. In contrast, the Malaysian students tend to there is no significant different between verbal and be ambiguity by frequent answered of “somewhat non-verbal materials for Malaysian undergraduates, agree” “somewhat disagree” and “neutral” in PPE and foreign workers in Malaysia and Japan who partici- site cleanliness scenario questions where they might pated in this experiment. not have sufficient knowledge to recognize the unsafe Overall, respondents who received non-verbal actions on sites. Besides, the findings show a different materials had similar attitudes towards scenarios as safety culture between Japanese and Malaysian con- the non-verbalized materials provided a level of visual struction sites and different opinions among foreign danger, providing the same level of understanding workers. The foreign technical trainees are able to regardless of whether the learner has field work experi- recognize the risks and know how to react correctly ences. Arguably, the verbalized materials do clearly to avoid unsafe behaviour during working at site; while convey what needs to be said, however the respon- the foreign workers who work in Malaysian construc- dents can only understand within the scope of the tion sites showed poor safety impressions as reflected explanation and may not understand the content from the scenario questions. All these unusual well enough to apply that knowledge (Arif et al. responses are reflecting the unsafe behaviour and 2021) especially those without field experiences. On poor working procedures in Malaysian construction the other hand, the non-verbal materials were effec - sites, as the foreign workers in Malaysia have different tively improved unsafe actions among the undergrad- perspective towards risk recognition and the potential uates, while verbal materials worked well among behaviour react to the risks due to lack of safety train- inexperienced persons in Japan. ing and low literacy level of education which is similar The majority of the safety training content is likely with the studies by Cheng and Wu (2013). Therefore, it to be shared internationally, yet, some of the safety can be confirmed that there are differences in the training contents may need to be customized due to perception of safety and health in different countries, the differences in national attitudes towards safety and and this was more apparent to the experiences than health in their working environments. In the event if the inexperienced. such customization, verbal materials are useful for Last, there were slightly differences between verbal native workforces while non-verbal materials will be and non-verbal materials in few questions among useful for foreign workforces if there are language Japanese undergraduates, postgraduates and techni- problems as there is no difference in understanding cal trainees, and no significant differences found between verbal and non-verbal materials for foreign among the Malaysian undergraduates and foreign workers. workers in Malaysia as it can be interpreted as they have same level of understanding of both materials. 2. Conclusion Based on the findings, the Japanese undergraduates understood the non-verbal materials better, while the This study provides an early phase of viewpoint on the Japanese postgraduates understood the verbal mate- effectiveness of verbal and non-verbal safety training rial better; there were only three questions identified materials through a cross country experiment to deter- differences among foreign technical trainees, it can be mine the assessment between different nationalities interpreted as insignificant differences for both train- and field experiences of students and foreign workers ing materials. Since the training materials used are in Japan and Malaysia. 12 T. ZI YI ET AL. The findings show that majority of the construction Disclosure statement workers and novices were able to provide positive No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. performance towards safety issues regardless the safety training materials. Overall, there were insignif- icant differences for both training materials between Notes on contributors inexperienced personnel in Japan, most of the Tan Zi Yi is an academic staff member at the School of Japanese students were able to show similar attitudes Engineering and Green Technology, Universiti Tunku Abdul like the technical trainees towards most of the scenario Rahman, Malaysia questions in PPE and lifting operation and site Shide Kazuya and Kanisawa Hirotake are both professors at cleanliness. the School of Architecture, Shibaura Institute of Technology The results indicated differences between foreign (SIT), Japan workers in Japan and Malaysia that might due to dif- Mine Naoto is a professor at SIT Research Laboratory, Japan ferent safety culture and working environment in both Otsu Kazuki and Koga Yohei were master degree student at nations; the foreign workers in Malaysia who are under SIT School of Architecture low literacy level and having language issues able to Someya Shunsuke is a PhD student at SIT School of perform in the assessment after the non-verbalized Architecture, Japan training, therefore these issues can be eliminated by using non-verbalized training materials. Since, there is insignificant difference between verbal and non-verbal ORCID training materials among each individual groups, yet, Tan Zi Yi http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5344-6351 the results found evidence for the superiority of non- verbal over verbal training materials, although the difference was small. The respondents who undergone References non-verbalized materials scored higher than verba- Abdul-Rahman, H., C. Wang, L. C. Wood, and S. F. Low. 2012. lized materials especially in work at height section. “Negative Impact Induced by Foreign Workers: Evidence in The results proven the non-verbal training was more Malaysian Construction Sector.” Habitat International effective in terms of providing a visual aid to standar- 36 (4): 433–443. doi:10.1016/j.habitatint.2012.03.002. dize the impression of the safety contents which can Ahn, S., T. Kim, Y. J. Park, and J. M. Kim. 2020. “Improving resolve the problems such as language barriers and Effectiveness of Safety Training at Construction Worksite low level of literacy for foreign workers. It can be Using 3D BIM Simulation.” Advances in Civil Engineering 2020: 1–12. doi:https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/2473138. claimed that the non-verbal training material was Ajslev, J., E. L. Dastjerdi, J. Dyreborg, P. Kines, K. C. Jeschke, more effective over a period of time especially in the E. Sundstrup, M. D. Jakobsen, N. Fallentin, and context of work at height. L. L. Andersen. 2017. “Safety Climate and Accidents at The study had limited sample respondents where it Work: Cross-Sectional Study Among 15,000 Workers of can be increased and expand construction workers of the General Working Population.” Safety Science 91: 320–325. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2016.08.029. different nationalities in future; and the non-verbalized Al-Bayati, A. J., O. Abudayyeh, T. Fredericks, and S. E. Butt. safety training materials used in the study were only 2017. “Managing Cultural Diversity at US Construction focused on the fundamental safety knowledge in con- Sites: Hispanic workers’ Perspectives.” Journal of struction site that produced by Japan publisher Construction Engineering and Management 43 (9): according to the Japan construction context. In future 4017064. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001359. research, non-verbal safety training content needs to Arif, M., A. R. Nasir, M. J. Thaheem, and K. I. A. Khan. 2021. “ConSafe4all: A Framework for Language Friendly Safety be customized for hazardous situations on construc- Training Modules.” Safety Science 141 (May): 105329. tion sites according to the safety culture in the host doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105329. country, and workers are trained in a visual way to Başağa, H. B., B. A. Temel, M. Atasoy, and İ. Yıldırım. 2018. enhance the ability in risk recognition to achieve better “A Study on the Effectiveness of Occupational Health and learning effects and promote industry safety education Safety Trainings of Construction Workers in Turkey.” Safety Science 110 (October 2017): 344–354. doi:10.1016/j.ssci. regardless of nationality. Furthermore, a generalized 2018.09.002. non-verbal safety training approach that is not custo- Baseline Survey Construction Report. 2015. “Health and mized for a specific scenario but suitable for the cus- Safety Attitudes and Behaviours in the New Zealand tomization of different scenarios can be further Workforce: A Survey of Workers and Employers.” Cross- explored and developed in the future. Sector Report. (A report to WorkSafe New Zealand and Maritime New Zealand). April. Blanchard, P., and M. Simmering. 2014. “Training Delivery Methods.” Encyclopedia of Business. Accessed Acknowledgements 5January2022. https://www.referenceforbusiness.com/ We would like to express our special thanks of gratitude to management/Tr-Z/Training-Delivery-Methods.html the publisher, Planex, Japan for the video contents used in BLR. 2014. “50 More Tips for More Effective Safety Training.” the experiment. Special Report, Business & Legal Reports 2. https://simplify JOURNAL OF ASIAN ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING ENGINEERING 13 training.com/app/uploads/2016/04/50-more-safety- www.ilo.org/safework/areasofwork/hazardous-work training-tips-TT.pdf /WCMS_356576/lang–en/index.htm Burke, M. J., R. O. Salvodor, K. Smith-Crowe, S. Chan-Serafin, International Labour Organization (ILO). 2021. “Safety and S. Sonesh, and S. Sonesh. 2011. “The Dread Factor: How Health at Work.” Accessed 7 January2022 https://www. Hazards and Safety Training Influence Learning and ilo.org/global/topics/safety-and-health-at-work/lang–en/ Performance.” The Journal of Applied Psychology 96 (1): index.htm 46–70. doi:https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021838. Ismail, R., R. Palliyaguru, G. Karunasena, and N. A. Othman. 2018. Casey, T., N. Turner, X. Hu, and K. Bancroft. 2021. “Making “Health and Safety (H&S) Challenges Confronted by Foreign Safety Training Stickier: A Richer Model of Safety Training Workers in the Malaysian Construction Industry: Engagement and Transfer.” Journal of Safety Research 78: A Background Study.” The 7th World Construction 303–313. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2021.06.004. Symposium, July, Sri Lanka, 277–287. https://www.research Cheng, C. W., and T. C. Wu. 2013. “An Investigation and gate.net/publication/326635913_Health_and_Safety_HS_ Analysis of Major Accidents Involving Foreign Workers in Challenges_Confronted_by_Foreign_Workers_in_the_ Taiwan’s Manufacture and Construction Industries.” Safety Malaysian_Construction_Industry_A_Background_Study Science 57: 223–235. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2013.02.008. Jaafar, M. H., K. Arifin, K. Aiyub, M. R. Razman, M. I. S. Ishak, and Dai, J., and P. M. Goodrum. 2011. “Differences in Perspectives M. S. Samsurijan. 2017. “Occupational Safety and Health Regarding Labour Productivity Between Spanish and Management in the Construction Industry: A Review.” English-Speaking Craft Workers.” Journal of Construction International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics Engineering and Management 9: 689–697. doi:10.1061/ (JOSE) 24: 493–506. doi:10.1080/10803548.2017.1366129. (ASCE)CO.1943-7862.0000329. Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA). 2021. “JICA Demirkesen, S., and D. Arditi. 2015. “Construction Safety Standard Safety Specification (JSSS).” Accessed Personnel’s Perceptions of Safety Training Practices.” 10February2022. https://www.jica.go.jp/english/our_work/ International Journal of Project Management 33: types_of_assistance/c8h0vm00008zx0m8-att/jsss_01.pdf 1160–1169. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2015.01.007. Jeschke, K. C., P. Kines, L. Rasmussen, L. P. S. Andersen, Department of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH). 2016. J. Dyreborg, J. Ajslev, A. Kabel, E. Jensen, and L. L. Andersen. “Occupational Safety and Health Master Plan (OSHMP) 2017. “Process Evaluation of a Toolbox-Training Program for 2016-2020.” OSH Transformation-Preventive Culture. Construction Foremen in Denmark.” Safety Science 94: Accessed 3 August2020 https://www.dosh.gov.my/index. 152–160. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2017.01.010. php/competent-person-form/occupational-health/new- Krzywinski, M., and N. Altman. 2014. “Nonparametric Tests.” resources/2873-occupational-safety-and-health-master- Nature Methods 11: 467–468. Accessed 10 January 2022. plan-2016-2020/file https://www.nature.com/articles/nmeth.2937 Esmaeili, B., and M. R. Hallowell. 2012. “Diffusion of Safety Li, X., W. Yi, H. L. Chi, X. Wang, and A. P. C. Chan. 2018. “A Critical Innovations in the Construction Industry.” Journal of Review of Virtual and Augmented Reality (VR/AR) Construction Engineering and Management 138 (8): Applications in Construction Safety.” Automation in 955–963. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0000499. Construction 86 (July 2016): 150–162. doi:10.1016/j.autcon. Evanoff, B., A. M. Dale, A. Zeringue, M. Fuchs, J. Gaal, 2017.11.003. H. J. Lipscomb, and V. Kaskutas. 2016. “Results of a Fall Mohammadi, A., M. Tavakolan, and Y. Khosravi. 2018. “Factors Prevention Educational Intervention for Residential Influencing Safety Performance on Construction Projects: Construction.” Safety Science 89: 301–307. doi:10.1016/j.ssci. A Review.” Safety Science 109 (2018): 382–397. doi:10. 2016.06.019. 1016/j.ssci.2018.06.017. Fang, D., and H. Wu. 2013. “Development of a Safety Culture Nykänen, M., V. Puro, M. Tiikkaja, H. Kannisto, E. Lantto, Interaction (SCI) Model for Construction Projects.” Safety F. Simpura, J. Uusitalo, et al. 2020. “Implementing and Science 57: 138–149. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2013.02.003. Evaluating Novel Safety Training Methods for Construction Forst, L., E. Ahonen, J. Zanoni, A. Holloway-Beth, M. Oschner, Sector Workers: Results of a Randomized Controlled Trial.” L. Kimmel, C. Martino, et al. 2013. “More Than Training: Journal of Safety Research 75: 205–221. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2020. Community-Based Participatory Research to Reduce 09.015. Injuries Among Hispanic Construction Workers.” OSH Statistics in Japan. 2020. “Japan Industrial Safety and American Journal of Industrial Medicine 56: 827–837. Health Association (JISHA).” Accessed 10 January2022. doi:10.1002/ajim.22187. https://www.jisha.or.jp/english/statistics/index.html Gao, Y., V. A. Gonzalez, and T. W. Yiu. 2019. “The Effectiveness Oswald, D., F. Wade, F. Sherratt, and S. D. Smith. 2019. of Traditional Tools and Computer-Aided Technologies for “Communicating Health and Safety on a Multinational Health and Safety Training in the Construction Sector: Construction Project: Challenges and Strategies.” Journal A Systematic Review.” Computers & Education 138 (May): of Construction Engineering and Management 145 (4): 101–115. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2019.05.003. 04019017. doi:10.1061/(asce)co.1943-7862.0001634. GraphPad. 2022. “Choosing Between the Mann-Whitney and Priyadarshani, K., G. Karunasena, and S. Jayasuriya. 2013. Kolmogorov-Smirnov Tests.” Accessed 15 January 2022. “Construction Safety Assessment Framework for http://www.graphpas.com//guides/prism/latest/statistics/ Developing Countries: A Case Study of Sri Lanka.” Journal stat_choosing_between_the_mann-whit.htm of Construction in Developing Countries 18 (1): 33–51. Guo, H., Y. Yu, and M. Skitmore. 2017. “Visualization United Nations. 2022. “Universal Declaration of Human Technology-Based Construction Safety Management: A Rights.” Accessed 15February2022. https://www.un.org/ Review.” Automation in Construction 73: 135–144. doi:10. en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights#:~: 1016/j.autcon.2016.10.004. text=Drafted%20by%20representatives%20with%20differ Industrial Safety and Health Act. (1972).“Laws of Japan.“ ent,all%20peoples%20and%20all%20nations Retrieved from https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/ Vignoli, M., K. Nielsen, D. Guglielmi, M. G. Mariani, L. Patras, en/laws/view/3440 and J. M. Peirò. 2021. “Design of a Safety Training Package International Labour Organization (ILO). 2015. “Construction: for Migrant Workers in the Construction Industry.” Safety A Hazardous Work.” Accessed 7 January2022. https:// Science 136 (January). doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.105124. 14 T. ZI YI ET AL. Wallen, E. S., and K. B. Mulloy. 2006. “Computer-Based Winge, S., E. Albrechtsen, and B. A. Mostue. 2019. “Causal Training for Safety: Comparison Methods with Older and Factors and Connections in Construction Accidents.” Younger Workers.” Journal of Safety Research 37 (5): Safety Science 112 (October 2018): 130–141. doi:10.1016/ 461–467. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2006.08.003. j.ssci.2018.10.015. Wang, Z., Z. Jiang, and A. Blackman. 2021. “Linking Emotional ZujovicL., V. Kecojevic, and D. Bogunovic. 2021. “Interactive Intelligence to Safety Performance: The Roles of Situational Mobile Equipment Safety Task-Training in Surface Mining.” Awareness and Safety Training.” Journal of Safety Research 78: International Journal of Mining Science and Technology 210–220. doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2021.06.005. 31 (4): 743–751. doi:10.1016/j.ijmst.2021.05.011. JOURNAL OF ASIAN ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING ENGINEERING 15 Appendix jurisdiction. The accident rate is the estimated number *Construction accident rate is the number of accident of fatal and injured victims (4 days or more off) per 1,000 represented a total number of casualties of 4 days or workers per year; while the fatal rate is the estimated more on leave as determined from the Report of number of fatal accident victims per 100,000 workers in Worker Casualties that submitted by the business opera- tor to the Labour Standard Inspection Office Under its a year.
http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png
Journal of Asian Architecture and Building Engineering
Taylor & Francis
http://www.deepdyve.com/lp/taylor-francis/a-study-on-the-effectiveness-of-non-verbal-teaching-materials-in-0lvBiExJQQ
