A Study of Behavioural Responses to an Industrial Disaster
Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Based upon 7 response variables we categorized the impact behaviour of 123 industrial employees who had been exposed to a disastrous factory explosion and had survived without suffering severe injuries. The subjects were personally examined and the data controlled by cross-interviews shortly after the disaster. In the analysis the subjects were divided into a high stress (n = 64) and a medium stress exposure group (n = 59) based upon their closeness to the explosion centre. The 7 variables were cognitive function, inadequate behaviour, help received, leadership, cooperative activity, absolute and relative rescue efforts. While about 50% of the total number reported some disturbance in their cognitive control, and 34% of the high stress exposure group experienced a near total loss of cognitive control, severe inadequate behaviour did not occur. Modelling and corrective social interactions may have played an important role in this. Still, 20% of the high stress exposure group had some behavioural response that increased the risk to their life or that of others. The 7 scores were added to an index and cut-off points established to separate 3 different groups of behavioural responses: 29% of the high stress group displayed Maladaptive Disaster Behaviour; inhibited behaviour and uncontrolled flight behaviour dominated in this group. Adaptive Disaster Behaviour was rated in 34% and Optimal Disaster Behaviour in 37%. The following background variables correlated strongly to Optimal Disaster Behaviour: high level of disaster training/experience, male sex, age above 40, maritime occupational background, above average intellectual ability, a life history without mental health problems. A discriminant analysis with 8 variables predicted correctly whether the response would be Optimal or less than that in 84% of the 121 subjects tested in the analysis. A high level of disaster training/experience yielded an overall correct prediction rate of 63.6%, and a sensitivity of 81%, specificity of 85.9% and positive predictive power of 70.7% in predicting Optimal Disaster Behaviour.
Wild J, El-Salahi S, Esposti M, Thew G PLoS One. 2020; 15(11):e0241704.
PMID: 33180798 PMC: 7660584. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0241704.
Yin Q, Wu L, Yu X, Liu W Front Psychiatry. 2019; 10:657.
PMID: 31616324 PMC: 6763688. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00657.
Usami M, Iwadare Y, Watanabe K, Kodaira M, Ushijima H, Tanaka T PLoS One. 2014; 9(10):e110898.
PMID: 25340759 PMC: 4207783. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0110898.
Usami M, Iwadare Y, Watanabe K, Kodaira M, Ushijima H, Tanaka T PLoS One. 2014; 9(2):e88885.
PMID: 24586427 PMC: 3929372. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0088885.
Mental health services required after disasters: learning from the lasting effects of disasters.
McFarlane A, Williams R Depress Res Treat. 2012; 2012:970194.
PMID: 22811897 PMC: 3395273. DOI: 10.1155/2012/970194.