基于PT-MA理论的装配式建筑施工安全管理行为演化博弈分析

doi:10.3969/j.issn.1007-7375.2021.02.009

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为提高施工安全管理质量，提出在装配式建筑施工人员、监管人员的传统演化博弈决策过程中，引入前景理论(PT)-心理账户(MA)理论，构建前景收益-支付价值感知矩阵，得到不同情境下演化系统所达到的帕累托状态，并构建Matlab算法验证分析参数变化对行为影响的演化路径。仿真结果表明，装配式建筑施工安全行为管理系统受到收益-支付感知偏差、乐观偏见、风险偏好与价值感知参考点4个关键因素调节，并且随着关键因素参数数值的变化呈现出不同的演化趋势，当且仅当施工人员重视安全行为且监管人员实行监管时，即M＞0、N＞0、U＞0、K＞0时，该系统才会向最佳理想状态演化。

关键词: 装配式建筑, 前景理论, 心理账户理论, 施工安全管理, 演化博弈

Abstract: In order to improve the quality of construction safety management, the Prospect Theory (PT)-Mental Accounts(MA) theory is introduced into the decision-making process of traditional dynamic game of prefabricated construction worker and regulator group. A prospect return–payment value perception matrix is constructed, achieving the "Pareto state" of evolutionary system under different conditions. In addition, Matlab algorithm verification is constructed to analyze the evolutionary path of the impact of parameter changes on behavior. The simulation results show that prefabricated building construction safety behavior management system is modulated by four key factors including revenue-payment perception deviations, optimism bias, risk appetite and value perception reference points, and has different evolution trend with the change of key factor parameters. If and only if the construction group attaches importance to safety behavior and the regulators implements supervision functions, that is, M＞0, N＞0, U＞0, K＞0, the system will evolve to the optimal state.

Key words: prefabricated building, prospect theory, psychological account theory, construction safety management, evolutionary game

中图分类号:

庄丽, 马婷婷, 刘硕, 刘兰梅. 基于PT-MA理论的装配式建筑施工安全管理行为演化博弈分析[J]. 工业工程, 2021, 24(2): 68-76,118.

ZHUANG Li, MA Tingting, LIU Shuo, LIU Lanmei. An Evolutionary Game Analysis of Behaviors Management of Prefabricated Building Safety Groups Based on PT-MA Theory[J]. Industrial Engineering Journal, 2021, 24(2): 68-76,118.

参考文献

[1] 中华人民共和国国务院办公厅. 国务院办公厅关于大力发展装配式建筑的指导意见[EB/OL](2016-09-27). http://www.gov.cn/zhengce/content/2016-09/30/content_5114118.htm.
[2] 陈伟, 乔治, 熊付刚, 等. 装配式建筑施工安全事故预防SD-MOP模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(1): 19-24
CHEN Wei, QIAO Zhi, XIONG Fugang, et al. SD-MOP model for preventing prefabricated construction safety accidents[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2019, 29(1): 19-24
[3] 李皓燃, 李启明, 陆莹. 基于SEM的装配式建筑施工安全关键风险分析[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(4): 171-176
LI Haoran, LI Qiming, LU Ying. Analysis of key safety risks in prefabricated building construction based on structural equation model[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2019, 29(4): 171-176
[4] 桑培东, 李金晓. 基于结构方程的装配式建筑项目开发建设风险评价[J]. 土木工程与管理学报, 2017, 34(4): 89-95
SANG Peidong, LI Jinxiao. Risk evaluation of prefabricated buildings development and construction based on structural equation[J]. Journal of Civil Engineering and Management, 2017, 34(4): 89-95
[5] 王志强, 张樵民, 王国强, 等. 基于FTA-SPA-灰色聚类的装配式建筑施工安全测评[J]. 安全与环境工程, 2018, 25(2): 166-173
WANG Zhiqiang, ZHANG Qiaomin, WANG Guoqiang, etal. Safety evaluation of prefabricated building construction based on FTA-SPA-Grey clustering[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2018, 25(2): 166-173
[6] HEINRICH H. Industrial accident prevent[M]. 4th Ed. New York: McGraw-hill, 1959.
[7] REASON J. A system approach to organizational error[J]. Ergonomics, 1995, 38(8): 1708-1721
[8] 李艳庆, 王则胜, 刘伟. 100起建筑施工死亡事故的统计分析与对策研究[J]. 施工技术, 2012, 41(S1): 289-291
LI Yanqing, WANG Zesheng, LIU Wei. Statistic analysis and cuntermeasures on 100 construction death accidents[J]. ConstructionTechnique, 2012, 41(S1): 289-291
[9] 严小丽, 胡兴俊, 王银志. 建设项目施工安全风险耦合及其应对——基于人因视角[J]. 安全与环境工程, 2016, 23(6): 106-113
YAN Xiaoli, HU Xingjun, WANG Yinzhi. Coupling mechanism of safety risks in construction projects and the countermeasures: From the perspective of construction workers[J]. Safety and Environmental Engineering, 2016, 23(6): 106-113
[10] CHEN H. Unsafe behavior study of major accidents in China coal mines[M]. Beijing: Science Press, 2006.
[11] GARCIA-SIERRA M, VAN DEN BERGH J C J M, MIRALLES-GUASCH C. Behavioural economics, travel behavior and environmental-transport policy[J]. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 2015, 41: 288-305
[12] 程敏, 陈辉. 基于演化博弈的建筑工程安全监管研究[J]. 运筹与管理, 2011, 20(6): 210-215
CHEN Min, CHEN Hui. Research on construction safety supervision based on evolutionary game theory[J]. Operation Research and Management, 2011, 20(6): 210-215
[13] 梅强, 马国建, 杜建国, 等. 中小企业安全生产管制路径演化研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2009, 17(2): 160-168
MEI Qiang, MA Guojian, DU Jianguo, et al. Research on the evolution of safety production control path of small and medium-sized enterprises[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2009, 17(2): 160-168
[14] KAHNEMAN D, TVERSKY A. Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk[J]. Econometrica, 1979, 47(2): 263-292
[15] 周国华, 张羽, 李延来, 等. 基于前景理论的施工安全管理行为演化博弈[J]. 系统管理学报, 2012, 21(4): 501-509
ZHOU Guohua, ZHANG Yu, LI Yanlai, et al. Evolutionary game analysis of behavior of construction safety based on prospect theory[J]. Journal of System Management, 2012, 21(4): 501-509
[16] 高建伟, 郭奉佳. 基于改进前景理论的直觉模糊随机多准则决策方法[J]. 控制与决策, 2019, 34(2): 317-324
GAO Jianwei, GUO Fengjia. Intuitionistic fuzzy stochastic multi-criteria decision-making method based on modifified prospect theory[J]. Control and Decision, 2019, 34(2): 317-324
[17] THALER R H. Mental accounting and consumer choice[J]. Marketing Science, 1985, 4(3): 199-214
[18] 韩帅, 陈红, 龙如银. 基于PT-MA理论的煤矿安全群体行为演化博弈分析[J]. 运筹与管理, 2017, 26(11): 77-86
HAN Shuai, CHEN Hong, LONG Ruyin. Evolutionary game analysis of behaviors of coal mine safety groups based on PT-MA theory[J]. Operation Research and Management, 2017, 26(11): 77-86
[19] GUREVICH G, KLIGER D, LEVY O. Decision-making under uncertainty —a field study of cumulative prospect theory[J]. Journal of Banking and Finance, 2009, 33(7): 1221-1229
[20] TVERSKY A, KAHNEMAN D. Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty[J]. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1992, 5(4): 297-323
[21] FRIEDMAN D. On economics applications of evolutionary game theory[J]. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 1998(8): 15-43
[22] VAN SCHIE E C M, VAN DER PLIGT J. Influencing risk preference in decision making: The effects of framing and salience[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 1995, 63(3): 264-275