There is no conflict of interest.
Citation
Hashem M. Mehany, M. S., Killingsworth, J., & Shah, S. (2021). An evaluation of training delivery methods’ effects on construction safety training and knowledge retention - A foundational study. International Journal of Construction Education and Research, 17(1), 18-36. https://doi.org/10.1080/15578771.2019.1640319
Highlights
- The study's objective was to examine the impact of four different formats of delivering construction safety training content on safety knowledge test scores.
- The study was a nonexperimental design that assigned participants to receive one of four training formats. Study authors used data collected from a safety knowledge test administered after the training to compare the outcomes of the safety training formats.
- The study did not find a statistically significant relationship between training delivery format and safety knowledge test scores.
- This study receives a low evidence rating. This means we are not confident that any estimated effects would be attributable to the construction safety training formats; other factors are likely to have contributed. However, the study did not find any statistically significant effects.
This page has been updated to comply with Executive Order 14168.
Intervention Examined
Tool-Box Talks
Features of the Study
Construction safety training is often delivered through tool-box talks, which provide essential safety information to employees before they start a task. The talks are delivered to construction workers and typically last between 5 to 7 minutes. The content of these talks includes workplace hazards, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations, and other relevant safety principles related to the specific task at hand. This study used a nonexperimental design to compare the safety knowledge outcomes of a confined space safety training (tool-box talk) that was presented in four different formats: (1) a text-based format including statements directly from the official OSHA confined space regulations; (2) a text with pictures format featuring the text-based content with images to enhance understanding; (3) a verbal/lecture format where the text-based content was read aloud while participants followed along with printed copies; and (4) a video format containing an OSHA-developed video that combined real-life visuals of confined space operations with a narrative that aligned with the text used in other training formats.
The study sample included 303 construction management students from a public university in the mountain-west region and 77 construction professionals; however, the study authors did not report sample demographic information. The authors assigned participants to receive one of four formats of training: 105 participants received the text-based format, 105 received the text with pictures, 81 received the verbal/lecture, and 89 received the video format. The verbal/lecture training was completed in a classroom setting for the student sample and construction site trailers for the professional participants. The primary data source was a survey administered immediately after training. The survey collected demographic details, information on previous training and construction experience, and included a knowledge test on confined space safety related to the training material. The authors used statistical analyses to examine the impact of various training formats on safety knowledge test scores.
Findings
Health and safety
- The study found no statistically significant relationship between training delivery format and safety knowledge test scores.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The authors did not test for similarity of groups at baseline or account for any baseline differences between the groups' demographic characteristics, such as age, race/ethnicity, and sex as required by the protocol. Also, while the authors collected information about industry specific experience, they did not administer a pretest to assess baseline confined space operations safety knowledge. Therefore, the study is not eligible for a moderate causal evidence rating, the highest rating available for nonexperimental designs.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the authors did not ensure that the groups being compared were similar before the intervention. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects would be attributable to the construction safety training formats; other factors are likely to have contributed. However, the study did not find any statistically significant effects.