arch logo

WALA - R (Work Accident Likelihood Assessment - Revised) Sample Report

Report for: Sample Reports
Completed on: Oct 28, 2024 at 04:18 PM (GMT -6)
Completed in: 16 min

The tendency to take dangerous risks is considered to be a function of many different elements. These can include personality traits, attitudes, and behavioral tendencies. The scales that contribute to Sample's accident proneness score are Sensation-seeking, Harm-avoidance, Conscientiousness, Positive Attitude Towards Safety, Attentiveness, and Responsibility. Each of these elements is addressed in his results. In addition, further information is provided about the types of risks he is likely to take. These scales can help Sample to become more aware of the areas in which he is more likely to take unnecessary chances.

Your Personality Type: The Chameleon

Sample displays both moderate harm-avoidance and sensation-seeking. This indicates that he either has a balanced risk-taking profile, taking moderate risks but eschewing extreme behavior, or that he takes extreme risks in certain areas, and none in others. He isn't overly concerned with the potential negative consequences of risk, but he doesn't take the possibility lightly either. He would probably adjust successfully to many different types of jobs, including those that follow a monotonous pace, and less tedious positions in which calculated risks are required.

Sample behaves in a relatively conscientious manner. In terms of risk-taking behavior, this probably means that he performs any risky tasks in the context of societal and organization rules, not to mention taking safety precautions in order to avoid potential negative effects.

Our statistics show that men score higher on all scales except Harm-Avoidance.

The concept of accident-proneness is one that has been hotly debated over at least the past eight decades. In 1918, researchers discovered that there were statistical anomalies in the number of accidents experienced by a small group of people. This small group of people experienced more than their expected share of accidents. While the statistical effect is rather small overall, some say that there is empirical evidence to support the concept of accident-proneness. The fact that some individuals seem to be "accident repeaters" is often noted by management in organizations, traffic regulators, sports instructors, and other areas where accidents seem to be a part of life for some. Many industries report that it appears as though a small percentage of their workers seem to commit the majority of the accidents. The fact is, our world is fraught with dangers, and the ability to manage these dangers is paramount in preventing accidents.

While some people might claim to have bad luck that gets them into accidents all the time, it could be that they are making conscious and subconscious decisions that get them into situations where they're more likely to be at risk. In life, people are often required to walk a fine line between being able to function in what could potentially become a dangerous situation, and becoming too comfortable, even reckless, in these situations. An extremely cautious person might become excessively nervous and stressed out when an element of danger exists (i.e., cracking under the pressure), but by going too far in the opposite direction, a person might take chances that look unnecessarily risky.

How a person reacts emotionally in these situations is the result of a combination of personality factors such as the tendency for sensation-seeking and harm-avoidance, two of the elements included on this test. The feelings a person experiences when exposed to the potential for danger influences whether he or she is very cautious or, on the contrary, tends to underestimate the risk. Another important personality trait is safety conscientiousness, which in this context, is important for determining whether a person feels a need to adhere to safety rules and precautions, or chooses to neglect them. Finally, the ability to concentrate for long periods of time can help ward off accidents caused by failure to pay attention.

A person's attitude towards safety rules and precautions is also relevant in determining the physical gambles he or she is willing to take. Having a scornful attitude towards rules does not lead to good safety habits, and neither does having a tendency to blame others or feeling powerless to prevent accidents. In addition, an attitude of "one-upmanship" or a tendency to take dares can also contribute to the amount of accidents a person experiences.

It is important to note that there are elements that are impossible (or, due to employment laws, illegal) to include in this test but could still play an important role in accidents, both on and off the job. The first relates to poor physical coordination. Many people, when put into a physically risky environment, are more likely than others to get hurt. Another factor that may play a role is the consumption of alcohol or drugs. Finally, sometimes a person's environment plays an important role in the occurrence of accidents. This is especially important when considering on-the-job accidents. Recent years have seen a rise in behavioral safety schemes in order to educate employees about safety hazards found on the job and hopefully, prevent injuries to themselves or others.

Impression Management

Probability of social desirability bias

30

Overall results

33

Sensation-seeking

49

Harm-avoidance

52

Conscientiousness

76

Positive Attitude Towards Safety

82

Attentiveness

69

Responsibility

88

Overall results

Overall level of accident proneness.
33
The personality, behavioral, and attitudinal scales on this assessment indicated that Sample is generally not a risk-taker. He is not someone who takes many risks in life, at work, or in his personal time. Even though his overall score is fairly low, he may still have some areas of concern when it relates to whether he is likely to take unnecessary or dangerous chances. Read the full report to see if there are any specific areas that stand out.

As detected by this test, the following is a list of habits/traits that may make Sample more or less prone to accidents:

  • Sample's responses indicate that he is not prone to competitive behavior. He likely wouldn't take risks to impress others or prove his bravery.
  • Sample's answers indicate that he does not have a history of accidents. While this certainly does not offer a guarantee that he won't have an accident in the future, it is an indication that he is generally careful.
  • Sample does not have a tendency to take safety risks.
  • Sample does not take risks by bending rules or laws.
  • Sample is not someone who would likely be accused of negligence. He takes the necessary steps to protect himself and others from accidents rather than ignoring potential threats.

Sensation-seeking

A desire for novel and exciting experiences.
49

Sample scored fairly low in sensation-seeking. He may be adventurous on certain occasions, but most of the time, prefers to take the more traveled path. He likely decides whether or not to seek thrills on a case-by-case basis. Depending on his mood or what the sensation in question is, he might opt to pass on the experience.

A sensation-seeking person is one who yearns to experience new, intense, and varied situations. Although this trait has many positive qualities, such an individual often takes more risks and is more easily bored than someone who lacks the sensation-seeking urge. In certain jobs and in some situations, sensation-seekers are an asset. They thrive on stress and action. In other situations however, they are liabilities because of the risks they are likely to take. In other words, high sensation-seeking in and of itself is not necessarily a negative personality trait.

Harm-avoidance

Harm-avoidance refers to the desire to steer clear of negative consequences.
52

Harm-avoidance is a trait that evolved early in human development because it is important for everyday survival - people avoid harm when they look both ways before crossing the street and when they avoid heights, for example. Today, survival means much more than simply avoiding death - it means avoiding financial trouble, professional failure, and social failure, among other things.

Sample received a medium score in harm-avoidance. He takes the relevant precautions for safe risk-taking, and avoids taking too many reckless chances. He has struck a healthy balance between confidence and overconfidence.

Conscientiousness

Refers to people who are rule abiding, careful, responsible, and less likely to take unwise and dangerous risks.
76
Sample scored in the upper mid-range of conscientiousness. He tends to be someone who tries to do good work at all times. He usually behaves in a responsible and principled manner, and would likely not bend the rules to make his job or life easier. While he did not score in the high range for this trait, he is still fairly conscientious and would likely set a good example for those with less discipline.

Positive Attitude Towards Safety

This scale measures reactions to rules and regulations in the workplace, and in general. It also assesses whether the test-taker has a punitive attitude towards people that break these rules. How one feels about these regulations will have an effect on his or her behavior.
82
Sample seems to have a very strict attitude towards following rules and laws that are in place for the express purpose of keeping people safe. He feels that people who break important rules and laws should be punished severely. He is also much more likely to place the blame for an accident on careless behavior on the part of employees than on the employer or unforeseen circumstances. He feels that it is extremely important to follow safety rules and regulations on the job. People's attitudes are usually expressed in their behavior, so these results indicate that Sample is likely someone who respects safety rules and regulations.

Attentiveness

Assesses how well and for how long the test-taker reports being able to concentrate on taxing mental tasks.
69
Sample scored in the medium-high range in attentiveness. This means that he is capable of devoting his full attention to a task until it's finished. Scoring in this range means that he is generally aware and can concentrate despite distractions. Although he might "zone out" on occasion, he is generally a fairly attentive person. Many work accidents happen because workers were not paying close enough attention, rather than intentional recklessness. It's important to remain attentive, and Sample usually has few problems doing just that.

Responsibility

Evaluates whether the test-taker views the consequences of his/her actions as his/her own responsibility or has a tendency to blame outside forces.
88
Sample takes responsibility for his actions, both in admitting culpability when he makes a mistake and when dealing with the consequences. He handles matters himself instead of handing that duty to someone else. People who take responsibility are more likely to think their actions through because they know that whatever happens afterwards, they will have to take responsibility for it.

Impression Management

Probability of social desirability bias

What is Impression Management?

Impression Management assesses the degree to which results on a test are distorted, biased, or manipulated. It is added to assessments like this one in order to call attention to suspicious test-taking behavior. When taking aptitude or personality tests, some people will try to present themselves in a better light, especially if the stakes are high, such as when they are applying for a job. The person may deliberately or subconsciously choose to underreport negative behaviors or overreport positive ones, or he or she may select responses that he or she believes other people will give under the same circumstances. Other names for concepts similar to Impression Management (though not necessarily identical) include Social Desirability, Gaming the Test, Faking, Faking Good, Distortion, Lying, and Self-deception.

How is Impression Management assessed?

A test-taker's answers on the Impression Management questions are compared to the responses of the general population who also took this assessment. When someone selects socially desirable responses that are rarely endorsed by other people, there is reason to believe that a self-presentation bias is at play.

It is important to keep in mind that a socially desirable response to any single Impression Management question could actually be the truth, in that the person is actually as good or as skilled as he or she is claiming to be. However, if most or all the questions on the scale follow a socially desirable pattern, it is unlikely that the person is being truthful, though not entirely impossible.

How should an Impression Management score be interpreted?

The information offered by an Impression Management scale is meant as a cautionary note, an indication to pay careful attention to the test-taker's results and to his or her responses in an interview. A high probability of social desirability casts doubt on a person's results, but this doesn't mean that he or she should automatically be dismissed solely based on that. The hiring manager should view this as a sign that they need to be particularly thorough when interviewing the candidate, paying special attention to the skills and traits a person claims to have and probing in the interview to see if the person is really as good as he or she claims to be. For additional tools that can help with the hiring process, we suggest that you use the interview questions module available in ARCH Profile, which provides questions that are tailored to a test-taker's results and specifically designed to probe deeper.

There is one caveat: any Impression Management scale can produce a false negative. People who are familiar with psychometrics may be able to detect Impression Management questions and achieve a low score. A false positive is also possible, in which a person is actually as wonderful and honest as he or she claims to be. However, both of these conditions are quite rare.

How did this test-taker perform on Impression Management?

The probability that Sample's responses were influenced by social desirability bias is low.

This means that while he picked a few responses that are associated with "faking good," it is likely that his results on the scales are a fairly accurate reflection of how he conducts himself in real life. It is always a good idea to validate that by asking probing interview questions in which you solicit concrete examples of situations when he displayed certain positive characteristics or competently managed challenging circumstances.

Below, you will find the problem areas identified from this test-taker's responses. Pay close attention to the red and yellow flags. Red flags indicate troubling behaviors that make this person much more prone to accidents. Yellow flags refer to behaviors that could become problematic if not addressed.

Accident Prevention Characteristics

  • He is not very accident-prone
  • He is not an extreme sensation-seeker
  • He has a no-nonsense attitude towards safety in general
  • He does not exhibit a competitive streak
  • He does not have a history of accidents
  • He tends to take responsibility for his behavior
  • He is not inclined to take risks that could endanger his safety or the safety of those around him
  • He is not inclined to break rules
  • He does not have a propensity to engage in negligent behavior

Yellow Flags

  • He does not always behave in a conscientious manner
  • He can sometimes be rather inattentive

Red Flags

  • He doesn't go out of his way to avoid harm
Studies as far back as the 1920s showed that people who had one accident were more likely to have another.

Advice made available with actual full reports only.

© PsychTests AIM Inc. All Rights Reserved