An accident is an unplanned event that sometimes has inconvenient or undesirable

consequences, other times being inconsequential.1 The occurrence of such an event indicates a

negative outcome that could have been prevented if the root cause had been detected and discussed.

To improve a company's health and safety efficiency, it is critical to determine the root causes of

injuries. Theories of accident causation have been established in an effort to anticipate and thereby

avoid accidents. The need for a theory derives from the challenge of offering reasonable and rational

reasons for why certain events, people, and equipment interacted to create a normally predictable

negative outcome. This paper will outline three accident causation theories which can be used to

assist in the prevention of accidents. The theories discussed are: Heinrich’s Domino Theory, Human

Factors Theory and Accident/Incident Theory.

Herbert Henrich developed the well-known Domino Theory, which led to the fundamental

understanding of accident causation. According to the Domino Theory, accidents are not random acts

of nature that occur out of nowhere. This theory is associated with the belief of five Dominos

standing on the thin base side, and when one falls, it will drive the others down, resulting in a cascade

of injuries.2 This theory is intended to help in the detection of intervention points, that if taken

advantage of, will result in a better outcome, such as no accident or an incident that does not result in

injuries or property harm. If only one of the first four aligned Dominoes is removed, the Dominoes

will not finish the sequenced fall and no damage will occur. The first and most important element

was ancestry and social climate. This aspect describes how negative behaviors that lead to people

engaging in risky behavior can be inherited or learned from the environment in which they were

raised.

1
Robertson S. Leon. 2015. Injury Epidemiology: Fourth Edition. Lulu Books.
2
Heinrich, Herbert W. 1931. Industrial accident prevention: A scientific approach. New York. McGraw-Hill.
4
The second element is the responsibility of the person, which means that people behave in risky ways

as a result of negative character traits they have developed. Unsafe acts or physical dangers are the

third factor, and they actually result in injuries, which are the fourth factor. Accidents then result in

the fifth element, injury. An injury caused by a worker's failure to wear safety clothing is an example

of the domino theory of accident causation. This may be due to valid factors such as discomfort when

wearing the gear. In an organization, Management may avoid many incidents by addressing the root

cause of such an unsafe act and then acting directly on the unsafe actions. They might, for example,

enforce interventions or have more comfortable protective gear. Following that, as a general rule,

they might mandate that everyone wear protective gear when working.

The Ferrell’s Human Factors Theory of Accident Causation attributes to a sequence of events

triggered by consistent human error. These factors are: overload, inappropriate responses, and

inappropriate activities.3 An overload occurs when a person's ability and the load they are bearing at

the same time are out of balance. A load in this context refers to pressures exerted by situational,

internal, or environmental factors, which an individual must bear in addition to their regular tasks and

responsibilities. Overwork and pressure are induced by overload, which impairs one's ability to think

and act logically when confronted with a threat. According to this theory, how a person reacts in such

a situation may either avoid or trigger an accident. If an individual notices a danger but does nothing

about it, they have acted improperly, which may result in an accident. Inappropriate reaction may also

be a conscious decision by the victim to make a mistake in order to cope with the overload.

The Accident/Incident Theory was established by Dan Peterson. This is an extension of the

human factor theory. It argues that risky behavior is caused by overload, ergonomic pits, or a

3
James Preston. 2005. "ILO Encyclopedia Of Occupational Health And Safety". Occupational Medicine 55 (6): 508-508.
4
conscious decision to make a mistake4. Deadlines and peer pressure can cause a person to make an

incorrect decision. An employee who is susceptible to peer pressure, for example, can succumb to

the pressure to work faster, increasing his chances of being involved in an accident5. Management's

job is to ensure that workers undergo safety training and follow safety procedures including

inspection and correction. To prevent environmental factors that can lead to health problems, a

company is responsible for maintaining a safe and healthy atmosphere6. The epidemiological theory

of accident causation arose as a direct consequence of the interaction between illness and

environmental factors. This is known as epidemiology, and it can be used to examine the association

between environmental causes and injuries.

Accidents happen, and they are usually blamed on carelessness or negligence which leads to

negative consequences that could be fatal. Accidents, especially those caused by a lack of awareness

and a failure to take safety precautions, are unnecessary and avoidable. Accident causation theories

have proved successful in a number of contexts, including the workplace and public facilities, where

interventions to avoid accidents have saved lives and avoided injuries. The domino theory has been

criticized for focusing on how injuries occur rather than what triggers them. It implies that one

incident automatically leads to the next, and that interrupting this sequence of events will prevent the

accident from happening, but it does not explain why these events occur. On the other hand, the

accident/incident theory explains why employees participate in risky behavior, or what triggers the

events that inevitably lead to accidents.

Safety conduct is critical for minimizing occupational injuries and indirectly affecting the results of

events that happened prior to the injuries or incidents. Many studies in workplace safety have found

4
Reason, James. 1990. Human Error. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
5
Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2013). Employer-Reported Workplace Injuries and Illnesses – 2012. Retrieved from:
http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/os/ostb3569.pdf
6
Haddow, G. D. and Bullock, J. A. 2006. Introduction to Emergency Management (2nd ed.). Oxford: Butterworth-
Heinemann.
4
that the root cause of accidents is human activity. It is human to make mistakes, and it is virtually

impossible to go through life understanding everything and making no mistakes. However, through

increasing awareness and penalizing excessively risky conduct, it is possible to significantly

minimize injuries.

4
 Bibliography

1. Leon S. Robertson. 2015. Injury Epidemiology: Fourth Edition. Lulu Books.

2. Herbert W. Heinrich, 1931. Industrial accident prevention: A scientific approach. New York.

McGraw-Hill.

3. James Preston. 2005. "ILO Encyclopedia Of Occupational Health And Safety". Occupational

Medicine 55 (6): 508-508.

4. James Reason. 1990. Human Error. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

5. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2013). Employer-Reported Workplace Injuries and Illnesses –

2012. Retrieved from: http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/os/ostb3569.pdf

6. Haddow, G. D. and Bullock, J. A. 2006. Introduction to Emergency Management (2nd ed.).

Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.