Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Empirical validation of the SCEQ-E shows promising reliability for assessing safety culture in energy organizations, suggesting potential for broader application.
• The SCEQ-E demonstrated acceptable internal consistency and strong factorial validity, supporting its reliability as a diagnostic tool. • Factor analyses confirmed a three-factor structure: Strategic decisions, HR practices, and daily behaviors. • This study distinguishes enacted safety culture from safety climate, supporting their empirical separation. • The SCEQ-E extends a nuclear-origin model into a cross-sector instrument for broader energy applications. This paper presents the adaptation and empirical validation of a tool to assess safety culture enactment in the energy sector. The Safety Culture Enactment Questionnaire-Energy (SCEQ-E) is an adapted version of the SCEQ (De Castro et al., 2017), originally developed for the nuclear industry and validated in Spanish. The SCEQ-E extends this instrument to the broader energy industry and was administered to employees working in different energy organizations (N = 146). The original questionnaire was translated into English, adapted to the energy sector, and reviewed by industry experts. Exploratory factor analysis supported a three-factor structure and two items were removed due to cross-loadings. Confirmatory factor analysis provided support for the proposed three-factor model, showing acceptable model fit and strong internal consistency for the total scale and subscales. The SCEQ-E also demonstrated good convergent validity and evidence of discriminant validity in relation to safety climate. Overall, the results indicate that the SCEQ-E provides initial evidence of reliability and construct validity and represents a promising instrument for assessing safety culture enactment in the energy industry, although further validation using larger and more diverse samples is warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wray et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: