Construction Safety Knowledge Sharing: A Psychological Perspective

  • Rita Yi Man LiEmail author


The recent popularity of Web 2.0 mobile apps and the Internet of Things provides a new perspective on asynchronous safety knowledge sharing. Workers from different teams who never meet can share knowledge easily by straightforward mechanisms. A natural starting point when conceptualising the role of economic institutions is to consider the incentives which affect people’s activities. This also matches the psychological theory well as that studies the factors that impact our behaviour. In this research paper, we examine the construction practitioners’ knowledge-sharing behaviour from (1) new institutional economic perspectives under the lens of informal institutions and (2) psychology’s perspectives, such as Homan’s proposition.


Construction safety Knowledge sharing Psychology New institutional economics 



An earlier version of the chapter appears in Li, Rita Yi Man, Kwong Wing Chau, Daniel Chi Wing Ho, Weisheng Lu and Mandy Wai Yee Lam (2018) Construction safety knowledge sharing by Internet of Things, Web 2.0 and mobile apps: psychological and new institutional economics, IOP Science Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering (MSE) (Scopus), XXI International Scientific Conference Construction the Formation of Living Environment, Moscow, Russia, IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Volume 365, pp. 1–8.


  1. Conti, Mauro, Ali Dehghantanha, K. Franke, and S. Watson. 2018. Internet of Things security and forensics: Challenges and opportunities. Future Generation Computer Systems 78: 544–546.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dave, B., and L. Koskela. 2009. Collaborative knowledge management—A construction case study. Automation in Construction 18 (7): 894–902.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Eurostat. 2016. Euro stat statistics explained [cited 24 Jan 2018]. Available from
  4. Guo, H., Y. Yu, and M. Skitmore. 2017. Visualization technology-based construction safety management: A review. Automation in Construction 73: 135–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kim, J., and M. Hastak. 2018. Social network analysis: Characteristics of online social networks after a disaster. International Journal of Information Management 38 (1): 86–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Krafft, M., T.E. DeCarlo, F.J. Poujol, and J.F. Tanner. 2012. Compensation and control systems: A new application of vertical dyad linkage theory. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management 32 (1): 107–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Kraft, A., J.L. Sparr, and C. Peus. 2018. Giving and making sense about change: The back and forth between leaders and employees. Journal of Business and Psychology 33 (1): 71–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Le, Q.T., D.Y. Lee, and C.S. Park. 2014. A social network system for sharing construction safety and health knowledge. Automation in Construction 46: 30–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Li, R.Y.M. 2012. Econometric modelling of risk adverse behaviours of entrepreneurs in the provision of house fittings in China. Construction Economics and Building 12 (1): 11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Li, R.Y.M. 2015. Construction safety and waste management: An economic analysis. Switzerland: Springer.Google Scholar
  11. Li, R.Y.M. 2017. Smart construction safety in road repairing works. Procedia Computer Science 111: 301–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Li, R.Y.M. 2018. An economic analysis on automated construction safety: Internet of Things, artificial intelligence and 3D printing. Singapore: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Li, R.Y.M., and K.W. Chau. 2016. Econometric analyses of international housing markets. Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Li, R.Y.M., and S.W. Poon. 2009. Future motivation in construction safety knowledge sharing by means of information technology in Hong Kong. Journal of Applied Economic Sciences IV (3(9)): 457–472.Google Scholar
  15. Li, R.Y.M., and S.W. Poon. 2011. Using Web 2.0 to share the knowledge of construction safety as a public good in nature among researchers: the fable of economic animals. Economic Affair 31 (1): 73–79.Google Scholar
  16. Moumita, D., J.C.P. Chen, and K.H. Law. 2015. An ontology-based web service framework for construction supply chain collaboration and management. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 22 (5): 551–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Nesheim, T., and J. Smith. 2015. Knowledge sharing in projects: Does employment arrangement matter? Personnel Review 44 (2): 255–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nourbakhsh, M., Z.R. Mohamad, J. Irizarry, S. Zolfagharian, and M. Gheisari. 2012. Mobile application prototype for on-site information management in construction industry. Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management 19 (5): 474–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Powell, K.H., and M.M. Dalton. 2003. Co-production, service exchange networks, and social capital. The Social Policy Journal 2 (2–3): 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shin, T.-H., S. Chin, S.-W. Yoon, and S.-W. Kwon. 2011. A service-oriented integrated information framework for RFID/WSN-based intelligent construction supply chain management. Automation in Construction 20 (6): 706–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Su, T., Z. Wang, X. Lei, and T. Ye. 2013. Interaction between Chinese employees’ traditionality and leader-member exchange in relation to knowledge-sharing behaviors. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal 41: 1071–1082.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. TSheets. 2018. Top 10 construction apps for 2018 [cited 4 March 2018]. Available from
  23. van Knippenberg, D., J.-W. van Prooijen, and E. Sleebos. 2015. Beyond social exchange: Collectivism’s moderating role in the relationship between perceived organizational support and organizational citizenship behaviour. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology 24 (1): 152–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Walther, J.B., J.-W. Jang, and A.A. Hanna Edwards. 2018. juxtaposition. Health Communication 33 (1): 57–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Zhao, C., J. Liu, F. Shen, and Y. Yi. 2016. Low power CMOS power amplifier design for RFID and the Internet of Things. Computers & Electrical Engineering 52: 157–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economics and FinanceHong Kong Shue Yan UniversityHong KongChina

Personalised recommendations