Inoculating for Underground Coal Mine Emergencies

Training for Safety n Emergencies Inoculating fo.r Underground Coal Mine Emergencies By Catherine Y. Kingsley Westerman, Katherine A. Margolis and Kathleen M. Kowalski-Trakofler he potential for emergencies is ever- learn a rote procedure for donning SCSRs that is present in coal mining. This is illustrated reviewed each quarter (Vaught, Brnich, Wiehagen, Tby statistics which show that "employees in et al., 1993). Such preparation provides a basic sur- coal mining are more likely to be killed or to incur vival skill and gives miners a good rule of thumb a nonfatal injury or illness, and their injuries are for what to do in an emergency. more likely to be severe, than workers in private Unfortunately, it is impossible to prepare for industry as a whole" (Rice & Jonocha, 2008, p. 1). every'potential situation because emergencies are As a result of this unpredictable. When escaping miners encounter constant exposure a situation that requires them to make a difficult -Emergency training for underground coal miners to harm, coal min- decision, they may waste precious time consider- can be developed using inoculation theory. which ers must be highly ing or discussing what to do. In addition, they may has been used to explain how people may resist trained to qeal with not know how to take action when working with a unwanted persuasion attempts by preparing various emergency group of people who have various and potentially counterarguments in advance. scenarios. For ex- disturbing reactions to the emergency. One way to -This theory is relevant in an emergency training ample, all under- help miners react quickly and effectively in such sit- context when used to help people react quickly ground coal miners uations is to have them think through pOSSible situ- and effectively to emergencies by preparing their must learn how to ations and plan their likely responses in advance. · responses in advance. operate lifesaving This article describes using inoculation theory -The researchers used a NIOSH training module emergency equip- principles to prepare miners for emergencies. This as an example of how the theory may be applied in ment, how to navi- is a unique application in that, to the authors' a training context to prepare workers psychologi­ gate out of the mine knowledge, these principles have not previously cally for emergencies in underground coal mines. through smoke or been applied in emergency preparation training. but the concepts can be applied in other industries obstacles, and how Preparation based on inoculation theory prin- that require emergency safety training. to administer first ciples differs from more traditional training in that aid. This knowledge it involves teaching trainees to think for themselves can help save lives rather than simply teaching them how to perform a in the event of an emergency. task or use a safety device. The simplicity of inocula- Some existing underground coal mine train- tion theory lends itself to trainers with content-area ing focuses on rote performance of prescribed ac- expertise who may not have formal training in adult tions. For example, coal miners are taught when education. This is particularly important in the min- and how to put on self-contained self rescuers ing industry, which relies on the master/apprentice (SCSRs), which are respirators that provide 60 style of teaching (Camm & Cullen, 2002), with old- minutes of breathable air. More specifically, they er, experienced workers pulled from the mine to be- The prin­ ciples of inoculation theory can be used for emergency safety trai n­ ing for min­ ers as well as for work­ ers in other high-risk industries.

come safety trainers. These workers' expertise is in AI will know what to do-they may avoid the idea mining, not teaching. Inoculation theory principles that it could happen and that AI might not be there. may be used by trainers to develop new materials or Thus, they may feel confident that an emergency to modify existing training materials. will not happen or, ifit does, that someone else will This article defines inoculation theory, briefly make sure they are okay. When an emergency does discusses its past use, and provides a brief example occur, these individuals could be highly vulnerable of how the theory can be applied when using a because of a lack of preparation. training module. In addition, it suggests how prac- Inoculation theory requires that two elements be titioners can apply the principles of this theory to present: threat and refutational preemption (Comp- their own emergency preparation training. ton & Pfau, 2005). Threat, defined as "a warning of possible future attacks on attitudes and the recogni- Inoculation Theory Explained tion of attitude vulnerability to change" (Szabo & . Inoculation theory was originally explicated by Pfau, 2002, p. 235), is necessary to motivate an indi- McGuire (1961), who uses a medical analogy to . vidual to prepare to defendhis/her belief. . explain the use of persuasive messages to change For example, let's assume that Jack believes attitudes. The medical analogy is straightforward: it is important to follow the safety procedures at similar to inoculation for a disease, wherein a his manufacturing job exactly as written. A threat weakened version of the disease is injected to help could be generated through a warning that some the individual develop immunity to the disease, people think following safety procedures slows inoculation for persuasive messages involves ex- them down and that someone may try to convince posing people to a weakened form of counterargu- Jack that it is not necessary to follow all the proce- ment to their already held beliefs in order to enable dures as written. Refutational preemption, which them to resist counterarguments when their beliefs Szabo and Pfau define as "the process of replying are attacked. Inoculation theory has been applied . to counterargurnents before they occur" (p. 235), successfully in areas such as advertising (Bither, gives individuals the tools (i.e., refutations) to use Dolich & Nell, 1971; Compton & Pfau, 2004); against future attacks as well as giving them prac- public relations (Burgoon, Pfau & Birk, 1995); po- tice in how to generate their own tools. litical campaigns (An, 2003; An & Pfau, 2004); and Relative to the cited example, a refutational pre- adolescent health campaigns-particularly to help emption might occur when Jack is told a story about adolescents resist ·peer pressure to drink alcohol a person who was careless about safety procedures (Duryea, 1983; Godbold & Pfau, 2000) . and was injured as a result. Jack could then use McGuire (1961) suggests that people tend to this anecdote (i.e., refutation) when he encounters avoid information that disagrees with their beliefs. those who do not believe safety procedures must As a result, when their beliefs are attacked, they be followed exactly. In addition, hearing this story are particularly vulnerable because they are not ex- might spur Jack to think of additional reasons why pecting the attack and are unprepared for the argu- he wants to follow safety procedures as written. As ments against their beliefs. In the case of a mine a result of formulating his own reasons, he will be emergency, it may be that miners believe it will not armed both with the refutation given to him (the happen at their mine or, if it does, that their buddy anecdote) and his own personal refutations that he has now generated in advance of a they may handle them in advance will help them confrontation. in a real emergency. Vaught, Bmich, Mallett, et al. Application of these principles (2000), provide an example of a mine emergency in an emergency preparation set- simulation. They suggest that although vicarious tingis simple. Expose miners to the experience of a mine emergency is not enough idea that an emergency can hap- preparation for a real emergency, it is superior to · pen and what it will be like if it does having had neither preparation nor advance dis- (i.e., threat); then provide miners cussion of decisions and issues that will undoubt- with some ways of dealing with the edly arise in an emergency. emergency (i.e., conduct a refuta- Inoculation theory can provide a basis for de- tional preemption to provide tools) veloping a store of information and responses to and engage them in thinking about emergency situations. The mining industry in par- how they would respond in an ac- ticular has relied "heavily on the mentorlleamer tual emergency. This should help (master/apprentice) relationship to train new min- miners deal with emergencies more ers" (Camm & Cullen, 2002, p. 37). Because of the efficiently and potentially more ef- technical nature of mining, trainers are often pulled fectively than had they not thought from mining ranks and do not receive speCialized through the possibilities and poten- training in education. Rather, they are content ex- tial responses in advance. By expos~ perts. The principles of inoculation theory are suffi- ing individuals to this weakened ciently basic that they can easily be understood and "emergency reality," inoculation applied when developing new training or modify- training can increase their ability to ing existing training. survive emergencies in two ways: In the case of the 1) by providing them with tools to counteract the Sample Application: refuge chamber emergency situation; and 2) by prompting them to Refuge Chamber Expectations Training module used to test come up with their own plans for such a situation. The training used as an example was designed for this application of Although inoculation theory has not previously underground coal miners. Refuge Chamber Expec- the theory, the refu­ been used to prepare for emergencies, researchers tations Training (Margolis, Kowalski -Trakofler & tational preemption in emergency management research and training Kingsley Westerman, 2009) teaches miners about gives miners the have suggested that advance preparation for emer- the physical and psychological conditions they may knowledge that all gencies is warranted (Colligan & Cohen, 2004) . In experience if they become trapped in a mine during the physiological . an experiment, Boer (2002) observes that when an emergency and must enter a refuge chamber. and psychological drivers entered a tunnel and became stuck behind To clearly explain the example, a brief review of reactions discussed a smoking vehicle, they were slow to act (e.g., wait- refuge chambers and the program itseli is provided in the training . ed in cars or left cars but did not use emergency exit (for full details, see Margolis, et al., 2009). In short, are normal and doors) . Boer reconunends that advance instruction refuge chambers are kept at specified intervals in an expected. for drivers in this area would improve their evacua- underground coal mine to provide a safe haven for tion behavior during a real tunnel emergency. trapped miners; chambers contain breathable air, Ockerby (2001) also recommends that people food, water, waste disposal, first-aid supplies and should be trained in forms of behavior under stress. other necessities that will support life for 96 hours .. He found that in past emergencies, the perception In the event of an emergency, miners are strongly that warning people would cause a panic resulted advised to escape the mine if possible; however, if in delayed evacuation efforts and worse conse- they are physically blocked from exiting the mine quences. If people are familiar with the situation or cannot walk out of amine, they may need to en- and know what to do, they can carry out a behavior ter a refuge chamber to be protected from a poten- such as evacuation. A study by Harbst and Madsen tially toxic and smoky atmosphere until they can be (1993) shows that once people are properly warned rescued. This program describes the physiolOgical of an emergency situation, 85 % will take protective and psychological responses miners may have to action and less than 3% will panic. being in a confined space for up to 4 days. Klein (1989) also supports the importance of Based on inoculation theory principles, train- advance preparation. In his recognition-primed ing should include two elements: threat and ref- decision model of decision making, Klein suggests utational preemption. Such training should also that if decision makers are already familiar with a include practice at generating tools. Therefore, given situation, then they immediately have avail- training should aim to provide enough exposure to able information specific to that situation, includ- the circumstances of a traumatic event to stimu- ing plausible goals, critical cues and causal factors, late an individual's defenses (i.e., threat). Train- expectancies and typical actions. These decision ing also should include a refutational preemption; makers will immediately be able to select a work- that is, miners should be given a refutation to the able course of action based on their experience. threat-a tool to help them deal with the situation. Applying the principles of inoculation theory in In addition, training should stimulate the miners to mining or similar industries would provide work- generate their own tools for potential emergencies. ers with this type of knowledge. Table 1 provides examples of elements from using In the context of mine emergencies, familiar- inoculation theory in a training program. izing miners with potential situations and how The training shows partiCipants the potential Table 1 Inoculation Theory Applied to Training Elements needed for Refuge chamber expectations Sample of content inoculation training example Threat Content on disturbing physical People may behave aggressively and psychological symptoms Refutation/tool Content on “normal” responses It is to be expected that some people will react in this way during a stressful situation. Practice at generating tools Post-viewing discussion Did you know how people may questions on how trainees might respond emotionally? For handle different reactions example, some may get quiet? What might you do to handle this? threat by discussing some physical and psycho- Providing tools to trainees simply involves teach- logical responses they might experience in a refuge ing them some ways of dealing with the threat pre- chamber, including responses such as sweating, sented in training. These tools are likely already the body aches; and aggressive or withdrawn behav- main focus of existing training; they may be safety ior. The refutational preemption gives miners the devices, such as refuge chambers or ear plugs, or knowledge that all the physiological and psycho- they may be procedures, such as knowing the chain logical reactions discussed in the training are nor- of command for reporting a mine emergency. mal and expected. Another element to combat the Finally, trainers must engage trainees in generat- threat of physiological and psychological responses ing their own tools, to use in emergencies by asking is the information that contrary to popular knowl- what they would do in an emergency. One tech- edge, people do not tend to panic in an emergency nique for achieving this is role-play. Role-playing (Ockerby, 2001; Harbst & Madsen, 1993). Simply directly involves trainees (Lawson, 2009) and com- possessing this knowledge can help a miner avoid pels them to think about how they would react. panicking and concentrate on the situation at hand. Brainstorming as a group or wo.rIqng in teams to The training also provides some practice at gen- solve a problem may also help trainees. erating solutions to the threat in the postviewing For example, suppose decision making is one fo- discussion questions. These questions specifically cus. Coal miners must decide what to do with an ask trainees to think about how they would handle injured worker (e.g., leave him behind or stay to-. the responses described in the program. The in- gether). It would be useful to role-play or generate struCtor is encouraged to generate more discussion ideas in teams to simulate the conditions of group targeted to the particular group and the potential decision making. Inoculation theory principles issues at the specific mine where the training is be- may be best suited to training that deals with situ- ing conducted. ations which have uncertainty surrounding them, such as injured workers or other uncomfortable Applying Inoculation Theory situations. They may not be as necessary or useful To apply inoculation theory when oeveloping for rote training (e.g., operation of a refuge cham- new training or modifying existing training, one ber), although they could be used to think through must remember three main components: gener- responses if a device does something unexpected. ate threat, give tools and practice developing tools. Inoculation theory also could be applied to other One way to generate threat would be to discuss sa- fields that require quick responses to situations that lient examples of emergencies. Research on adult involve uncertainty. For example, the theory could education suggests that "adults are motivated to have been used in an attempt to avoid the Challeng­ learn as they experience needs . . . that learning will er explOSion in 1986. This explOSion was traced back satisfy" (Knowles, Holton III & Swanson, 2005, to failed O-rings on the shuttle; it was determined p. 39). Establishing a threat's existence by giving the explosion was preventable. The problem was examples and scenarios demonstrates to trainees poor communication among engineers, their man- that they need to learn about these emergency sit- agers and high-level decision makers. Engineers uations and, thus, should enhance their learning. knew the launch was not safe because of the low For example, trainers could discuss injuries that temperatures on the day of the launch; however, have occurred or present real-life scenarios about under pressure to produce, managers reversed their people who were in emergency situations. Trainers recommendation to halt the launch. in the mining industry can access real accident re- Training to address this issue remains key in in- ports through MSHA's digital library (www.msha dustries where high-level officials with decision- .gov/trainingllibrary/mshaportal/index.html). making power may not be as familiar with the Other industries may have similar reports or exist- workings of products as those performing the work. ing training scenarios that would be applicable. In In this case, workers in a training session would be addition, some trainees may have experience with presented with a threat that in a high-pressure prod- emergencies that they can share. uct launch situation, decision makers may not listen to expert advice if that advice is negative. Refuta- issue/advocacy advertising campaigns. Communication tional preemption could be carried out by sharing Research, 22, 485-505. the Challenger story as an anecdote about the results Camm, T.W. & Cullen, E.T. (2002). Releasing the of overruling the advice of those most familiar with energy of workers to create a safer workplace: The value the product. Refutational preemption also could of using mentors to enhance safety training. In R.H. Peters (Ed.), Strategies for improving miners' training. include providing the name of a high-level person Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Hu- with whom concerns about the product launch can man Services (DHHS), CDC NIOSH. be shared and who will then present them to high- Colligan, M.J. & Cohen, A. (2004). The role bf level decision makers. During the training, workers training in promoting workplace safety and health. In J. also could be encouraged to generate ideas about Barling & M.R. Frane (Eds.), The psychology ofworkplace what they would do if they urgently needed to stop safety (pp. 223-248). Washington, DC: American Psy- a product launch for safety reasons but decision cholOgical Association. makers would not listen to their concerns. Compton, J.A. & Pfau, M. (2004). Use of inoculation Inoculation theory also may be useful for training· to foster resistance to credit card marketing targeting college students. Journal of Applied Communication workers in an industry such as steel, oil or nuclear Research, 32, 343-364. power who must know how to respond on the spot Compton, J.A. & Pfau, M. (2005). Inoculation theory if emergencies arise. For example, a steel worker of resistance to influence at maturity: Recent progress in may see an emergency developing and know that theory development and application and suggestions for the best solution is to shut down the production future research. Communication Yearbook, 29, 97-145. line. However, s/he may believe the boss will dis- Duryea, E.J. (1983). Utilizing tenets of inoculation agree with that decision and, therefore, may hesitate theory to develop and evaluate a preventive alcohol to take action. Inoculation theory training would education intervention. Journal ofSchool Health, 53(4), help demonstrate to the worker that a threat exists 250-256. L.c. & (e.g., supervisor's opinion that production should Godbold, Pfau, M. (2000). Conferring resis- tance to peer pressure among adolescents. Communica­ never be shut down) and provide a refutational pre- tion Research, 27(4), 411-437. emption by giving the trainee some tools for deal- Harbst, G. & Madsen, F. (1993). The behavior of ing with the threat (e.g., pointing out the company's passengers in a critical situation on board a passenger value statement that safety is number one and pro- vessel or ferry (Technical report). Copenhagen, Den- duction is number two). Finally, trainees could be mark: Danish Investment Foundation. asked to devise their own solutions to the situations. Klein, G.A. (1989). Recognition-primed decisions. In W. Rouse .(Ed.), Advances in man-machine systems Conclusion research (pp. 47-92). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. The principles of inoculation theory can be used Knowles, M.S., Holton III, E.F. & Swanson, R.A. (2005). The adult learner (6th ed.). Burlington, MA: for emergency safety training for miners as well as Elsevier. for workers in other high-risk industries. Train- Lawson, K (2009). The trainer's hanrIbook (3rd ed.). ers with content expertise should be able to ap- San Francisco: Pfeiffer. ply these principles and practice using the tools. Margolis, KA., Kowalski-Trakofler, KM. & King- Although the main example focused on training sley Westerman, c.y. (2009). Refuge chamber expecta- miners for incidents involving refuge chambers at tions training (Information circular 9516). Washington, underground coal mines, other mine emergency DC: DHHS, CDC, NIOSH. response groups such as command center person- McGuire, W.J. (1961). The effectiveness of support- nel and mine rescue teams, along with workers in ive and refutational defenses in immunizing defenses. Sociometry, high-risk industries, firefighters, police and other 24,184-197. MSHA. MSHA digital library. Washington, DC: U.S. first responders, could benefit from using these Department of Labor (DOL), Author. Retrieved Nov. 20, principles to prepare for emergencies. 2009, from www.msha.gov/trainingllibrary/msha portaUindex.html. References Ockerby, P. (2001). Evacuation of a passenger ship. An, C. (2003). Efficacy of inoculation strategies in Is panic a major factor? Australian Journal of Emergency promoting resistance to potential attack messages: A source Management, 16, 8-14. credibility perspective. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rice, J.B. & Jonocha, J.A. (2008). Coal mining in- University of Oklahoma. juries, illnesses and fatalities in 2006. Washington, DC: An, C. & Pfau, M. (2004). The efficacy of inoculation DOL, BLS. Retrieved Nov. 17, 2009, from www.bls in televised political debates. Journal ofCommunication, .gov/opub/cwc/sh20080623arOlp1.htm. 54, 421-436. Szabo, E.A. & pfau, M. (2002). Nuances in inocula- Bither, S.W., Dolich, I.H. & Nell, E.B. (1971). The tion: Theory and applications. In J.P. Dillard & M. Pfau application of attitude immunization techniques in mar- (Eds.), The persuasion handbook (pp. 233-258). Thousand keting. Journal ofMarketing Research, 18, 56-61. Oaks, CA Sage. Boer, L.c. (2002). Behavior by motorists on evacua- Vaught, c., Bmich, M.J., Mallett, L.G.,.et al. (2000). tion of a tunnel (INO Report No. TM-02-C034). Study Behavioral and organizational dimensions of under- commissioned by the Ministry of Transport, Public ground mine fires (IC 9450). Washington, DC: DHHS, Works and Water Management. Retrieved Jan. 6, 2010, CDC, NIOSH. from www.rijkswaterstaat.nIJrwslbwd/home/pdf/ Vaught, c., Bmich, M.J., Wiehagen, W.J., et al. tunneUtno/tno_rep.pdf. (1993). An overview of research on self-contained self- Burgoon, M., Pfau, M. & Birk, T.S. (1995). An in- rescuer training (Bulletin 695). Washington, DC: U.S. oculation theorv exolanation for the effects of corporate Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines.