Exploratory sequential mixed-methods study evaluates cognitive ability's influence on unsafe behavior, highlighting its temporal variations among workers.
Unsafe behaviors among construction workers constitute a major contributing factor to construction accidents, making it critically important to explore their underlying mechanisms and temporal dynamics from a cognitive perspective. This study employed an exploratory sequential mixed-methods approach. Initially, grounded theory was used to conduct three-level coding of in-depth interview data from 35 construction workers, resulting in the development of a cognitive theory model of unsafe behavior among construction workers comprising two main categories: ‘ perceptual recognition’ and ‘cognitive response’. Subsequently, a questionnaire was designed based on this model, and a 10-day longitudinal survey was conducted among 300 workers. Multi-group structural equation modelling was employed to analyze the temporal variation in the relationship between cognitive ability and unsafe behavior. The results indicate that: workers’ cognitive abilities can be decomposed into four dimensions—perceiving danger, identifying hazards, perceptual response, and decision-making response—and further summarized into two higher-order factors: perceptual recognition and cognitive response; (2) cognitive abilities are significantly negatively correlated with unsafe behavior; (3) this relationship exhibits significant temporal variations, with the inhibitory effect on Day 5 (path coefficient −0.95) being stronger than that on Day 1 (−0.88) and Day 10 (−0.50); furthermore, the ‘cognitive response → decision-making response’ path also shows significant differences between Day 5 and Day 10. The study reveals the pattern of fluctuations over time in the inhibitory effects of workers’ cognitive ability on unsafe behavior, providing a theoretical basis for construction companies to implement dynamic and targeted safety interventions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: