[SystemSafety] Safety Culture

[Peter Bishop]

On 10/12/2017 16:13, Peter Bernard Ladkin wrote:
> 
> 
> On 2017-12-10 15:41 , Fredrik Asplund wrote:
>> 2,4. Well, that depends on what *you* accept as proof of a causal relationship, which is intimately tied to which research paradigm, as well as which theoretical framework, you assume. Which ones would you assume/accept? 
> As many people here know, I am usually happy with the Counterfactual Test.

Is a counterfactual test appropriate here?
I am not sure you can say there is a direct logical relationship
where you can say presence /absence of X always determines whether an
accident will/will not happen (as it might with a physical safety system).

A probabilistic relationship would be more appropriate for human
activities, i.e. presence /absence of X changes the *probability* an
accident will happen.

Correlation of X with accidents does not prove causation, but if X was
implemented with the specific goal of reducing accidents, the observed
correlation would support a claim that X probilistically reduces accidents.

Peter Bishop
> 
> PBL
> 
> Prof. Peter Bernard Ladkin, Bielefeld, Germany
> MoreInCommon
> Je suis Charlie
> Tel+msg +49 (0)521 880 7319  www.rvs-bi.de
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> The System Safety Mailing List
> systemsafety at TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
> 

-- 

Peter Bishop
Chief Scientist
Adelard LLP
24 Waterside, 44-48 Wharf Rd, London N1 7UX
http://www.adelard.com
Recep:  +44-(0)20-7832 5850
Direct: +44-(0)20-7832 5855

Registered office: Stourside Place, Station Road, Ashford, Kent TN12 1PP
Registered in England & Wales no. OC 304551. VAT no. 454 489808

This e-mail, and any attachments, is confidential and for the use of
the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please
telephone 020 7832 5850. We do not accept legal responsibility for
this e-mail or any viruses.