Risk Assessment for Subjective Evidence-based Ethnography Applied in High Risk Environment: Improved Protocol
Philippe Fauquet-Alekhine *
Nuclear Power Plant and Training Center of Chinon, BP80, 37420 Avoine, France and Laboratory for Research in Sciences of Energy, Doué, France and SEBE-Lab., Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton St., WC2A 2AE, London, UK
Sophie Le Bellu
SEBE-Lab., Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton St., WC2A 2AE, London, UK and Renault SAS, Department of Research and Development, Cognitive Ergonomics Lab., 1 Avenue du Golf, 78084 Guyancourt, France
Marion Buchet
Department of Alphajet Flight Simulator, French Air Force Army, Airbase 705, Tours, France
Jérôme Berton
University Hospital of Angers, Angers, France
Guillaume Bouhours
University Hospital of Angers, Angers, France
Frédéric Daviet
Nuclear Power Plant and Training Center of Chinon, BP80, 37420 Avoine, France
Jean- Claude Granry
University Hospital of Angers, Angers, France
Saadi Lahlou
SEBE-Lab., Department of Psychological and Behavioural Science, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton St., WC2A 2AE, London, UK
*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Abstract
Subjective Evidence-Based Ethnography (SEBE) is a family of methods developed for investigation in social science based on subjective audio-video recordings with a miniature video-camera usually worn at eye-level (eye-tracking techniques are included). Facing a lack of tools for SEBE risk assessment when applied to high risk professional environments (e.g. anesthetists, aircraft pilots, nuclear reactor pilots), a protocol (version 1.1) was successfully developed and tested in nuclear industry with N1=59 participants and presented in a previous article. However, further cases were needed to demonstrate the robustness of the risk assessment protocol in other contexts. Further applications were thus undertaken with N2=75 participants from Air Force army, Police, Medicine and Nuclear industry during work activities lasting from 10 minutes to several hours. SEBE equipment was worn and the original risk assessment protocol was applied and/or discussed between participants and researchers for improvement. The protocol was enriched (version 2.3): 37% items were added. This illustrated the context sensitiveness of this sort of risk assessment. Limits of this new series of tests are discussed.
Keywords: Activity analysis, eye tracking, high risk industry, risk assessment, miniaturised camera, video