Snežana Živković, Milan Veljković

DOI Number
First page
Last page


The paper presents the theoretical groundwork of people’s safety in the working environment observed from the psychophysiological point of view. This aspect was considered through the characteristics and influence of the psychic processes, traits and states on the individual safety during the work. Bearing in mind that each person is different and represents a distinctive and unique person that is structured in a specific and special way, the knowledge of the psychophysiological characteristics of people is a crucial factor for professional safety.

Specifically, worker traits such as individual differences, personality, emotions, knowledge, cognition, and similar, influence employees activities and behaviour, as well as and the outcome of their work in terms of safety – whether or not an occupational injury or accident occurred or whether there was a possibility of threats. Through the study of the psychophysiological features of a human, i.e. its psychic characteristics, processes, and personality, it is possible to a certain extent to influence the improvement of the safety parameters in the workplace as well as the efficient functioning of the "man-production environment" system.



Safety, psychological states, psychological processes, personality traits.

Full Text:



Arquillos, A.L., Romero, J.C.R., Gibb, A. (2012). Analysis of construction accidents in Spain, 2003-2008. Journal of safety research, 43(5-6), 381-388.

Водопьянова, Н.Е, Старченкова, Е.С. (2016). Синдром выгорания. Санкт-Петербург: Издательский дом Питер.

Burnham, J.C. (2008). The syndrome of accident proneness (Unfallneigung): Why psychiatrists did not adopt and medicalize it. History of Psychiatry, 19, 251-274.

Cattell, R.B., Eber, H.W., Tatsuoka, M.M. (1970). Handbook for the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire. Champaign, Illinois: IPAT.

Crum, A.J., Akinola, M., Martin, A., Fathc, S. (2017). The role of stress mindset in shaping cognitive, emotional, and physiological responses to challenging and threatening stress. Anxiety, stress, & coping, 30(4), 379-395.

De Ramirez, S.S., Hyder, A.A., Herbert, H.K., Stevens, K. (2012). Unintentional injuries: magnitude, prevention, and control. Annual review of public health, 33, 175-191.

Devereux, J., Hastings, R., Noone, S. (2009). Staff stress and burnout in intellectual disability services: Work stress theory and its application. Journal of Applied Research in Intellectual Disabilities, 22(6), 561-573.

Ergai, A., Cohen, T., Sharp, J., Wiegmann, D., Gramopadhye, A., Shappell, S. (2016). Assessment of the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS): Intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. Safety Science, 82, 393-398.

Farmer, E., Chambers, E.G. (1926). A Psychological Study of Individual Differences in Accident Rates. London: Report No. 38, Medical Research Council, Industrial Fatigue Research Board.

Luczak, H. (1991). Work under extreme conditions. Ergonomics, 34(6), 687-720.

Marbe, K. (1926). Praktische Psychologie der Unfälle und Betriebsschäden. München: R. Oldenbourg.

Selye, H. (1936). A syndrome produced by diverse nocuous agents. Nature, 138, 32.

Schager, B. (2008). Human Error in the Maritime Industry. Göteborg: Breakwater Publishing.

Tavakoli, M. (2010). A positive approach to stress, resistance, and organizational change. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 1794-1798.

Томашевский, Т. (1971). Человек в системе труда. У: Эргономика: проблемы приспособления условий труда к человеку. Москва: Мир.

Yerkes, R.M, Dodson, J.D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459-482.

Занько, Н.Г., Малаян, К.Р., Русак, О.Н. (2010). Безопасность жизнедеятельности. 13-е изд. Caнкт-Петербург – Москва – Краснодар: Лань.

Živković, S. (2012). Psihologija grupa. Niš: Fakultet zaštite na radu u Nišu.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

ISSN   0354-804X (Print)

ISSN   2406-0534 (Online)