Culture’s Consequences on the Categorisation of Causal Factors in Aviation Accident Reports

Abstract

In aircraft accident investigations, the classification of causal factors to different parts of the organisational hierarchy ranging from upper-level management to frontline operators has been known to differ depending on accident investigators’ national culture backgrounds. There however remains a research gap in assessing how within-group, intra-cultural variations between individual values and attitudes can affect the attribution of accident causes, particularly in culturally diverse environments. The present research involved thirty (N = 30) accident investigators’ categorisation of causal factors of the same incident using the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) [1]. Rather than using geopolitical countries to categorise participants into groups, individual cultural values were assessed using Hofstede’s six-dimension model in order to capture intra-cultural variations [2]. The frequency of participants selecting a HFACS category as contributory were compared with their six Hofstede’s dimensions. It was discovered that the attribution of accident causes to categories in the Unsafe Acts of Operators level (HFACS Level 1) were driven by the investigators’ Power Distance and Long-Term Orientation dimensions; categories in the Preconditions of Unsafe Acts level (HFACS Level 2) were unaffected by investigators’ Hofstede’s dimensions; and the higher HFACS levels concerning supervisory and organisational influences (Levels 3 and 4) were moderated by Uncertainty Avoidance and Long-Term Orientation. Findings of the present research can provide insight into sources of bias in accident investigations and inform adjustments for consequential training and operational changes.