Literature DB >> 8698035

Usefulness of the protection motivation theory in explaining hearing protection device use among male industrial workers.

S Melamed1, S Rabinowitz, M Feiner, E Weisberg, J Ribak.   

Abstract

The present study examined the usefulness of personal variables: noise annoyance, and components of the protection motivation theory (R. W. Rogers, 1983) along with social-organizational factors in explaining hearing protection device (HPD) use among Israeli manufacturing workers. Participants were 281 men exposed to harmful noise levels for which routine HPD use is required by regulation. In practice, 3 HPD user groups were identified: nonusers (n = 38), occasional users (n = 125), and regular users (n = 118). HPD use was objectively verified. HPD use was primarily related to the personal variables but not to management pressure, coworker pressure, or family support. The most powerful predictors of HPD use were perceived self-efficacy (for long-term HPD use), perceived susceptibility (to hearing loss), and noise annoyance, together explaining 48% of the outcome variance. These findings have implications for interventions aimed at motivating workers to use HPDs regularly.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8698035     DOI: 10.1037//0278-6133.15.3.209

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Health Psychol        ISSN: 0278-6133            Impact factor:   4.267


  9 in total

1.  A multi-component intervention to promote hearing protector use among construction workers.

Authors:  Noah S Seixas; Rick Neitzel; Bert Stover; Lianne Sheppard; Bill Daniell; Jane Edelson; Hendrika Meischke
Journal:  Int J Audiol       Date:  2010-11-24       Impact factor: 2.117

2.  Predictors of hearing protection use in construction workers.

Authors:  Jane Edelson; Richard Neitzel; Hendrika Meischke; William Daniell; Lianne Sheppard; Bert Stover; Noah Seixas
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2009-06-16

3.  Safety climate, hearing climate and hearing protection device use among transportation road maintainers.

Authors:  Jennifer M Cavallari; Katrina A Burch; Jeffrey Hanrahan; Jennifer L Garza; Alicia G Dugan
Journal:  Am J Ind Med       Date:  2019-05-19       Impact factor: 2.214

4.  Social Desirability Bias in Self-Reporting of Hearing Protector Use among Farm Operators.

Authors:  Marjorie C McCullagh; Marie-Anne Rosemberg
Journal:  Ann Occup Hyg       Date:  2015-07-23

5.  Towards a Holistic Model Explaining Hearing Protection Device Use among Workers.

Authors:  Olivier Doutres; Jonathan Terroir; Caroline Jolly; Chantal Gauvin; Laurence Martin; Alessia Negrini
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2022-05-04       Impact factor: 4.614

6.  Indicators of hearing protection use: self-report and researcher observation.

Authors:  Stephanie C Griffin; Richard Neitzel; William E Daniell; Noah S Seixas
Journal:  J Occup Environ Hyg       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 2.155

7.  Prevalence of Hazardous Occupational Noise Exposure, Hearing Loss, and Hearing Protection Usage Among a Representative Sample of Working Canadians.

Authors:  Katya Feder; David Michaud; James McNamee; Elizabeth Fitzpatrick; Hugh Davies; Tony Leroux
Journal:  J Occup Environ Med       Date:  2017-01       Impact factor: 2.162

8.  Noise Exposure and Self-reported Hearing Impairment among Gas-fired Electric Plant Workers in Tanzania.

Authors:  Witness John; Gloria Sakwari; Simon Hendry Mamuya
Journal:  Ann Glob Health       Date:  2018-10-09       Impact factor: 2.462

9.  Prevalence of high frequency hearing loss consistent with noise exposure among people working with sound systems and general population in Brazil: a cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Regina P El Dib; Edina M K Silva; José F Morais; Virgínia F M Trevisani
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2008-05-07       Impact factor: 3.295

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.