Workplace safety / accidents
Every factor researchers have brought together to explain workplace safety / accidents, combined from 2 study models into one ranked driver set — the model the priority engine reasons over.
4 drivers · 2 contributing models · Handbook entry →
§1The drivers, by consensus
Ranked by how many independent models include each driver (consensus), then pooled effect. “In N of 2” is a robustness signal — a driver in many models is one many researchers agreed matters; a driver in one is a single lead worth following.
| Driver | Consensus | Pooled r | Grade | Heterogeneity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Safety Climate | 2 / 2 | −0.30 | A | — |
| Safety Compliance | 2 / 2 | −0.17 | A | — |
| Safety Participation | 1 / 2 | −0.15 | A | — |
| Psychological Safety Climate | 1 / 2 | −0.14 | A | — |
“Pooled r” is the meta-analytic prior where one exists; drivers marked study-reported have a model but not yet a pooled prior — a concrete acquisition target. This is the value-of-information view in miniature: the priority engine can rank which driver to measure first by consensus, strength, and how much is still unknown.
§2The models it’s built from
Each contributing study model — the researcher’s theory of this outcome — with its size and grade, so the meta-model is auditable back to its sources.
| Source study | Predictors | Grade |
|---|---|---|
| doi:10.1037/a0016172 | 4 | A |
| doi:10.1037/a0021484 | 2 | A |