The paper 'What Can Learn from Investigating Major Accidents' is a good example of a Social Science Research Paper. Accidents are of many forms. The most common are car accidents. Other forms may be sports-related accidents, work-related accidents, fire accidents and so many more. Whatever form of the accident there is, the aftermath is always hard to bear. Apart from the various types of accidents, it is also worth noting that there are different groups of people who’ s work is directly related to providing assistant or support either to the accident victims themselves or to their immediate families.
Such support can still be classified according to when the support is given: there are groups who are committed into assisting right after the accident (such as bringing the victim to the hospital or providing firs aid treatments) or support several hours or days after the accident (which is normally done by investigating how the accident occurred and what could have been done to prevent it). Objectives This paper is aimed at investigating major accidents. Specifically, this paper will find out what can be learned from assessing and examining major accidents.
To find out, this paper will be tackling various topics related to major accidents such as: the types of accidents which are considered major groups of people who are normally seen attending to such major accidents and what roles they specifically perform learning that can possibly be achieved once a particular major accident has been investigated Methodology This paper will be working on a theoretical framework, which can best be explained through the diagram below: The researchers believe that the ideas that can be shared by the people who have been in a major accident, will be a very good tool to understanding the full concept and impact of the accident on the victims themselves.
In the same manner, the point of view of the support groups (members of the rescue operation teams, the medical groups, and the likes) are also helpful in the overall understanding of what can be learned from investigating major accidents. Hence, this study will be focused on studying two main aspects - that of the experiences and lessons gained from the major accident victims themselves and the point of view from the support groups.
The skills that they need, the responses that they have to muster depending on the types of accidents they will deal with and the post-evaluation techniques that they also need to have in accordance to studying the after-effects of the accident are all part of the information that will be gathered from the major accident support groups. In doing so, an in-depth literature study and review will be conducted in this paper. Most updated Websites, journals, and magazines related to the subject of study will be gathered and analyzed. The research gathered will then serve as guides in conducting the interviews with some mentors or trainers of rescue team members.
The researchers are targeting to interview a maximum of 5 people who have had a major accident most recently and another 5 people who are members of different accident support groups (of varying age, gender, and level of experience). These respondents will be chosen strategically and will be asked to answer the following questions: For the accident victims: Why do you think you had such an accident? Do you think there are some things that you could have done to prevent such an accident?
If so, what are those? Did you get any lesson from such an accident? For the Accident Support Groups: How long have you been in this line of work? What motivated you to be part of this line of the job? What are the skills you have acquired that made you effective in dealing with various major accidents that you have attended? Summaries and generalization of the responses to the given questions will be done. Thus, the results and discussion of the study are obtained by analyzing the results of the interview conducted and correlating it with the research. Ethical Considerations It should be noted that the interviewees are both from the professional groups and/or ordinary citizens.
Questions and the very manner of talking with them should first be guided and as much as possible, be formal, respecting their profession and their age. It should not be forgotten that conducting human and literature research needs to follow certain rules and guidelines. For human research, permission prior to conducting the research must be sought first, and a letter from the university or from the investigators’ advisers will be much helpful. Questions for the interviews must be carefully prepared and the interviewees have the right to see and/or read the questions first and review it before they will provide their own answers. As for literature research, considerations concerning copyright guidelines must be adhered to. Whatever type of literature it is – may it be a journal, a new paper clip, or even previous research – they must all be cited as part of the reference list at the end of the paper. Resources and Support Needed Letters from the university and from the supervisor may be needed so that the researcher will be allowed access to various history books, journals, and/or articles.
More so, from time to time, the researcher will need to consult the supervisor if the research is on the right track and if everything is flowing smoothly. A once-a-week meeting between the teacher and the supervisor is ideal. Timescale/Research Planning This paper will consume a minimum of five weeks to finalize.
The first 2 weeks will be attributed to an in-depth literature review. From this literature review, the investigators will be able to identify the concepts related to major accidents such as the types of accidents, the common reactions of the victims and their immediate families as well as some statistics related to major accidents. Another two weeks will be spent on conducting the interview – the accident victims and the support groups. It is hoped that from the literature review, the researchers will be able to correlate the data gathered with the information that will be sought from the interviewees. The last week will be spent on generalization and analysis. Information gathered from the in-depth literature review as well s the interview will be summarized.
Conclusion and recommendation will all be based on the summarized analysis. Dissemination/Outcome As this paper tackles one of the most common life-altering events, it cannot be denied that a number of advantages will be achieved in the success of this paper. First, the investigators themselves will find the results of this study helpful in their attempt to gain wider knowledge about the general perspective with regards to major accidents.
The results that will be gathered in this study will enhance the investigators’ knowledge on various perspectives of major accidents – from the accident victim themselves and even from the support groups who have been dealing with major accidents as part of their responsibilities. Mentors or trainers will also find this paper beneficial as they too, can acquire ideas and tips on how to strategically approach their trainees in imparting the required skills for them to perform effectively before, during, and after a major accident takes place.
More so, the result of this study will provide much-needed assistance to other researchers who intend to study other related topics to accidents. This paper will serve as their guide on what to do with their papers, such as where to start, how to go about their methodology, and what areas they can best focus on with their study.
American Hospital Association. 1999. Sharps injury prevention program: a step-by-step guide. (Pugliese G, Salahuddin M, eds.) Chicago.
Clark, Donald. Introduction to Instructional Design System. July 1995. Updated November 6, 2000.
Davis MS. 1999. Advanced precautions for today’s O.R.: the operating room professional’s handbook for the prevention of sharps injuries and bloodborne exposures. Atlanta: Sweinbinder Publications LLC.
Edmond, M., Khakoo, R., McTaggart, B., Solomon, R. 1988. Effect of bedside needle disposal units on needle recapping frequency and needlestick injury. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 9:114-16.
Gerberding, J.L. 1993. Procedure-specific infection control for preventing intraoperative blood exposures. Am J Infect Control 21:364-7.
Goad, Tom W. Delivering Effective Training. San Diego, CA: University Associates, 1982. 1996. Association of Research Libraries, Washington, DC. http://www.arl.org/training/ilcso/goadmodel.html
Hanrahan, A., Reutter, L. 1997. A critical review of the literature on sharps injuries: epidemiology, management of exposure and prevention. J Adv Nurs 25:144-54.
Rapiti, E., Pruss-Ustun, A. and Hutin Yvan. 2005. Sharp Injuries: Assessing the burden of disease from sharps injuries to health-care workers at national and local levels. Environmental Burden of Disease Series, 11:1-50.
Spitzer, Dean. Five Keys to Successful Training. June 1986. 1996. Association of Research Libraries, Washington, DC.