Safety Stressors and Coal Miners' Safety Performance: The Mediating Role of Resilience and Coping Styles.

Purpose: This study aimed to investigate the effects of three different safety stressors (safety role ambiguity, safety role conflicts, and safety interpersonal conflicts) on safety performance of coal miners under the mediating role of resilience and coping styles. Patients and Methods: The study is cross-sectional. To collect data to analyze the hypothesized relationships in the present study, a total of 450 questionnaires were distributed to coal miners in Shannxi Province of China. Regression analysis was employed as the main statistical technique in analyzing the data using SPSS 22.0 and Process 4.1. Results: The results of regression analysis indicate that the three kind of safety stressors have a negative predictive effect on coal miners' safety performance. Resilience and coping styles both were the mediating variables between the safety stressors (safety role ambiguity, safety role conflicts, and safety interpersonal conflicts) and coal miners' safety performance, and resilience and coping styles play a chain mediating role between the safety stressors (safety role ambiguity, safety role conflicts, and safety interpersonal conflicts) and safety performance of coal miners. Conclusion: This study further explores the mechanism between safety stressors and safety performance, providing theoretical guidance for improving the safety performance of coal mines. It emphasizes the importance of coal miner's resilience intervention, positive coping styles promotion, and negative coping styles prevention in coal mine safety production.

Safety stressors, safety-specific trust, and safety citizenship behavior: A contingency perspective.

Employee safety citizenship behavior (SCB) is critical for workplace safety in a high-risk work environment, but few studies have addressed how safety stressors affect SCB. This study investigates the different relationships between safety stressors (safety role ambiguity, safety role conflict, and interpersonal safety conflict) and two forms of SCB (proactive and prosocial). It also examines the moderating effect of safety-specific trust (cognition- and affect-based) within these relationships. An analysis of 332 multisource data from frontline workers and their safety supervisors in China reveals that safety role ambiguity and safety role conflict negatively affect proactive safety behaviors, while interpersonal safety conflict impedes prosocial safety behaviors. Additionally, cognition-based safety trust alleviates the effects of safety role ambiguity and safety role conflict on proactive safety behaviors, whereas affect-based safety trust effectively restricts the influence of interpersonal safety conflict on prosocial safety behaviors. These results suggest that managers need to instill SCB in their subordinates and combat stressful conditions through interventions that enhance safety-specific trust.