基于SOR理论的快递员不安全行为影响因素分析及管理对策

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2025.09.0997

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为了减少快递员因工作倦怠心理引发的不安全行为,有效避免安全事故,基于刺激-机体-反应(SOR)理论框架,采用混合研究方法探讨快递员不安全行为的影响因素及管理对策。首先,整合实地访谈与问卷调查数据,从人、机、环、管四维因素出发,分析工作倦怠与安全态度对快递员不安全行为的作用路径;其次,构建包含人、机、环、管四维因素、工作倦怠、安全态度及不安全行为的概念模型;最后,运用Smart PLS 4.0软件验证结构方程模型,并根据分析结果对国家、快递企业和快递员提出相应的管理提升策略。结果表明:工作倦怠与安全态度对快递员不安全行为存在显著正向影响;其中,人、机、环、管四维度因素通过工作倦怠的中介作用间接影响不安全行为,机、环、管三维度因素通过安全态度的中介作用间接影响不安全行为(p<0.05)。

关键词: 刺激-机体-反应(SOR)理论, 工作倦怠, 安全态度, 快递员, 不安全行为

Abstract:

In order to reduce couriers' unsafe behaviors caused by job burnout and effectively avoid safety accidents, this study aimed to explore the influencing factors and management countermeasures of couriers' unsafe behaviors based on the Stimulus-Organism-Response (SOR) theoretical framework, employing mixed research methods. Firstly, it integrated data from on-site interviews and questionnaires, and analyzed the action paths of work burnout and safety attitude on couriers' unsafe behaviors from the four-dimensional factors of man, machine, environment, and management. Secondly, it constructed a conceptual model that includes the four-dimensional factors (man, machine, environment, and management), work burnout, safety attitude, and unsafe behaviors. Finally, it used Smart PLS 4.0 software to verify the structural equation model and put forward corresponding management improvement strategies for the state, express enterprises, and couriers based on the analysis results. The results show that work burnout and safety attitude have a significant positive impact on couriers' unsafe behaviors. Among them, the four-dimensional factors of man, machine, environment, and management indirectly affect unsafe behaviors through the mediating role of work burnout; the three-dimensional factors of machine, environment, and management indirectly affect unsafe behaviors through the mediating role of safety attitude (p<0.05).

Key words: Stimulus-organism-response (SOR) theory, job burnout, safety attitude, courier, unsafe behavior

中图分类号:

X956生活安全

田方圆, 陈祖杰, 李红霞. 基于SOR理论的快递员不安全行为影响因素分析及管理对策[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2025, 35(9): 87-95.

TIAN Fangyuan, CHEN Zujie, LI Hongxia. Analysis of influencing factors and management countermeasures of courier's unsafe behavior based on SOR theory[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2025, 35(9): 87-95.

图/表 8

图1

表1

表2

表3

图2

图3

表4

表5

参考文献 27

[1]	国家统计局, 中华人民共和国2023年国民经济和社会发展统计公报[EB/OL](2024-02-28). https://www.stats.gov.cn/sj/zxfb/202402/t20240228_1947915.html.
[2]	三明高速交警. 三明高速上一货车侧翻起火,快递全部被烧毁.[EB/OL]. (2025-1-19)[2025-05-18]. https://www.sohu.com/a/850662578_196697.
[3]	上海市公安局交警总队. [五大曝光]2024年10月21日至10月27日本市快递外卖行业交通违法和交通事故情况![EB/OL]. (2024-11-02). https://www.163.com/dy/article/JFVV8SUG0514K07O.html.
[4]	方奕, 王静, 周占杰. 城市快递行业青年员工工作及生活情境实证调查[J]. 中国青年研究, 2017(4):5-11.
[5]	WASTON J B. Psychology from the standpoint of a behaviorist[M]. Philadelphia and London: J. B. Lippincott Co.,1919:55-88.
[6]	陈子涵, 李磊, 欧阳有鹏, 等. 非正式组织视角下煤矿工人群体动力对不安全行为驱动因素分析[J]. 中国安全生产科学技术, 2024, 20(3):126-133.
	CHEN Zihan, LI Lei, OUYANG Youpeng, et al. Analysis on driving factors of group dynamics on unsafe behavior of coal miners from perspective of informal organization[J]. Journal of Safety Science and Technology, 2024, 20(3):126-133.
[7]	陈伟珂, 刘国义. SOR理论框架下施工人员安全行为研究:情绪智力与具身认知视角[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2021, 21(5):2139-2148.
	CHEN Weike, LIU Guoyi. Research on the safety behavior of construction personnel under the framework of SOR theory:Perspective of emotional intelligence and embodied cognition[J]. Journal of Safety and the Environment, 2021, 21(5):2139-2148.
[8]	李琰, 毛钰, 张燕. 建筑工人应急行为影响机制[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2021, 31(10):1-7. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2021.10.001
	LI Yan, MAO Yu, ZHANG Yan. Influence mechanism of construction workers'emergency behavior[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2021, 31(10):1-7. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2021.10.001
[9]	FREUDENBERGER H J. Staff burn-out[J]. Journal of Social Issues, 1974, 30(1): 159-165.
[10]	MASLACH C, SCHAUFELI W B, LEITER M P. Job burnout[J]. Annual Review of Psychology, 2001, 52(2001): 397-422.
[11]	许加明, 田萍, 闵兢, 等. 养老护理员工作倦怠现状及影响因素研究[J]. 护理管理杂志, 2023, 23(7):579-582.
	XU Jiaming, TIAN Ping, MIN Jing, et al. Research on the current situation and influencing factors of job burnout of nursing assistants for the elderly[J]. Journal of Nursing Administration, 2023, 23(7):579-582.
[12]	许红军, 王楠, 袁子晴. 民航飞行员工作倦怠影响因素研究[J]. 经营与管理, 2024,(6):144-152.
[13]	周建亮, 胡飞翔, 邢艳冬, 等. 工作压力、职业倦怠对建筑工人不安全行为的影响[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(11):14-22. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.11.2539
	ZHOU Jianliang, HU Feixiang, XING Yandong, et al. Influence of job stress and burnout on unsafe behaviors of construction workers[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(11):14-22. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.11.2539
[14]	BASAHEL A M. Safety leadership, safety attitudes, safety knowledge and motivation toward safety-related behaviors in electrical substation construction projects[J]. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 2021, 18(8): DOI:10.3390/ijerph18084196.
[15]	叶贵, 越宏哲, 叶鑫. 建筑工人内隐和外显安全态度对安全行为的影响[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2024, 34(12):2-7. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.12.0222
	YE Gui, YUE Hongzhe, YE Xin. Impact of implicit and explicit safety attitudes on safety behavior among construction workers[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2024, 34(12): 2-7. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2024.12.0222
[16]	LIANG Qi, ZHOU Zhiyuan, YE Gui, et al. Unveiling the mechanism of construction workers'unsafe behaviors from an occupational stress perspective: a qualitative and quantitative examination of a stress-cognition-safety model[J]. Safety science, 2022,145: DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105486.
[17]	孙剑, 黄倩倩, 章伯阳, 等. 事故体验对建筑工人不安全行为意向的影响机理研究[J]. 安全与环境学报, 2025, 25(4):1424-1433.
	SUN Jian, HUANG Qianqian, ZHANG Baiyang, et al. Investigating the influence mechanism of accident experience on construction workers' intentions to engage in unsafe behaviors[J]. Journal of Safety and Environment, 2025, 25(4): 1424-1 433.
[18]	贺宜, 孙昌鑫, 彭建华, 等. 电动载货三轮车风险行为及影响因素分析[J]. 吉林大学学报:工学版, 2023, 53(2):413-420.
	HE Yi, SUN Changxin, PENG Jianhua, et al. Analysis of risk behaviors and influencing factors of electric cargo tricycles[J]. Journal of Jilin University: Engineering Edition, 2023, 53(2):413-420.
[19]	张芷璐, 卢国斌, 姜福川. 基于自我控制和职业倦怠中介作用的矿工心理韧性对安全绩效的影响[J]. 煤矿安全, 2023, 54(2):246-251.
	ZHANG Zhilu, LU Guobin, JIANG Fuchuan. Influence of mental toughness of miners on safety performance based on mediating effect of self-control and job burnout[J]. Safety in Coal Mines, 2023, 54(2):246-251.
[20]	PEKER M, DOĞRU O C, MEŞE G. Role of supervisor behavioral integrity for safety in the relationship between top-management safety climate, safety motivation, and safety performance[J]. Safety and Health at Work, 2022, 13(2):192-200.
[21]	付汉良, 曹文娜, 王萌萌, 等. 建筑工人工作倦怠对不安全行为的影响:正念的调节作用[J/OL]. 工程管理学报:1-6.[2025-07-01].https://doi.org/10.13991/j.cnki.jem.2025.01.021.
	FU Hanliang, CAO Wenna, WANG Mengmeng, et al. The influence of construction workers' job burnout on unsafe behaviors: the moderating effect of mindfulness[J/OL]. Journal of Engineering Management: 1-6.[2025-07-01].https://doi.org/10.13991/j.cnki.jem.2025.01.021.
[22]	禹敏, 栗继祖, 秦文静. 心理社会安全氛围对矿工不安全行为的影响[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2022, 32(7):34-40. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.07.1357
	YU Min, LI Jizu, QIN Wenjing. Influence of PSC on miners' unsafe behaviors[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2022, 32(7):34-40. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2022.07.1357
[23]	田方圆, 田水承, 李红霞, 等. 新冠疫情下民众心理特征与应急管理体系完善[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2020, 30(11):30-36. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2020.11.005
	TIAN Fangyuan, TIAN Shuicheng, LI Hongxia, et al. Psychological symptoms of public under COVID-19 outbreak and improvement of emergency management system[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2020, 30(11):30-36. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn 1003-3033.2020.11.005
[24]	MASLACH C, JACKSON S E. The measurement of experienced burnout[J]. Journal of OccupationalBehavior, 1981,2:99-113.
[25]	李超平, 时勘. 分配公平与程序公平对工作倦怠的影响[J]. 心理学报, 2003, 35(5):677-684.
	LI Chaoping, SHI Kan. The influence of distributive justice and procedural justice on job burnout[J]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2003, 35(5):677-684.
[26]	MEHDI J, ANAHITA F, SEPIDEH M, et al. Safety attitude and its associated factors among workers in micro- and small-scale enterprises (MSSES) in shiraz[J]. Journal of health sciences and surveillance system, 2017, 5(3): 138-143.
[27]	王阳, 温忠麟, 李伟, 等. 新世纪20年国内结构方程模型方法研究与模型发展[J]. 心理科学进展, 2022, 30(8):1715-1733. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1042.2022.01715
	WANg Yang, WEN Zhonglin, LI Wei, et al. Methodological research and model development on structural equation models in China's mainland from 2001 to 2020[J]. Advances in Psychological Science, 2022, 30(8):1715-1 733.

变量名称	Cronbach's α系数	项目个数
工作倦怠	0.956	5
	0.945	4
	0.934	6

维度	情绪耗竭	去个性化	低成就感	人的因素	机的因素	环境因素	管理因素	情感	认知	意动	不安全行为
情绪耗竭	1	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
去个性化	0.957^**	1	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
低成就感	0.298^**	0.294^**	1	—	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
人的因素	-0.306^**	-0.308^**	-0.857^**	1	—	—	—	—	—	—	—
机的因素	-0.152^**	-0.170^**	-0.869^**	0.815^**	1	—	—	—	—	—	—
环境因素	-0.287^**	-0.302^**	-0.896^**	0.840^**	0.855^**	1	—	—	—	—	—
管理因素	-0.260^**	-0.273^**	-0.907^**	0.871^**	0.887^**	0.887^**	1	—	—	—	—
情感	0.616^**	0.637^**	-0.354^**	0.300^**	0.419^**	0.352^**	0.344^**	1	—	—	—
认知	0.086	0.088	-0.834^**	0.737^**	0.815^**	0.789^**	0.813^**	0.591^**	1	—	—
意动	-0.248^**	-0.266^**	-0.912^**	0.836^**	0.888^**	0.883^**	0.899^**	0.344^**	0.829^**	1	—
不安全行为	0.950^**	0.948^**	0.236^**	-0.249^**	-0.112	-0.230^**	-0.212^**	0.677^**	0.128^*	-0.216^**	1

维度	Cronbach's α	rho_A	CR	平均抽取变异	项目个数
人的因素	0.822	0.823	0.882	0.651	4
机的因素	0.831	0.831	0.887	0.663	4
环境因素	0.864	0.865	0.902	0.648	5
管理因素	0.907	0.908	0.925	0.607	8
工作倦怠	0.762	0.836	0.871	0.704	15
安全态度	0.811	0.886	0.888	0.730	24
不安全行为	0.956	0.956	0.963	0.765	8

影响路径	初始样本	样本均值	标准差	t统计量	p值	假设	接受/拒绝
人的因素→安全态度	0.014	0.012	0.063	0.224	0.823	H6	拒绝
人的因素→工作倦怠	-0.314	-0.317	0.1	3.129	0.002^**	H1	接受
机的因素→安全态度	0.445	0.447	0.06	7.486	0.000^**	H7	接受
机的因素→工作倦怠	0.423	0.428	0.119	3.558	0.000^**	H2	接受
环境因素→安全态度	0.238	0.236	0.061	3.901	0.000^**	H8	接受
环境因素→工作倦怠	-0.387	-0.387	0.109	3.552	0.000^**	H3	接受
管理因素→安全态度	0.231	0.233	0.068	3.388	0.001^**	H9	接受
管理因素→工作倦怠	-0.259	-0.255	0.131	1.976	0.048^*	H4	接受
工作倦怠→不安全行为	0.963	0.965	0.027	35.6	0.000^**	H5	接受
安全态度→不安全行为	0.3	0.296	0.027	10.958	0.000^**	H10	接受

影响路径	初始样本	样本均值	标准差	t统计量	p值	假设	接受/ 拒绝
人的因素→工作倦怠→不安全行为	-0.302	-0.305	0.097	3.118	0.002^**	H_11a	接受
人的因素→安全态度→不安全行为	0.004	0.004	0.019	0.227	0.821	H_12a	拒绝
机的因素→工作倦怠→不安全行为	0.407	0.412	0.111	3.682	0.000^**	H_11b	接受
机的因素→安全态度→不安全行为	0.134	0.132	0.019	7.144	0.000^**	H_12b	接受
环境因素→工作倦怠→不安全行为	-0.373	-0.374	0.105	3.538	0.000^**	H_11c	接受
环境因素→安全态度→不安全行为	0.072	0.07	0.02	3.581	0.000^**	H_12c	接受
管理因素→工作倦怠→不安全行为	-0.249	-0.246	0.127	1.963	0.048^*	H_11d	接受
管理因素→安全态度→不安全行为	0.069	0.069	0.022	3.197	0.001^**	H_12d	接受