One of the founding models of SPoR is One Brain and Three Minds (https://safetyrisk.net/one-brain-three-minds-what-the-research-says/ ). This is based on all the research that demonstrates that we ‘think’ at various speeds, not just ‘fast and slow’ as proposed by Kahneman. There is no binary functioning of human ‘thinking’. Indeed, all the research show that many of our bodily systems (our Mind) work independently of the brain and later inform the brain of what has happened. There is endless research that supports this (https://safetyrisk.net/essential-readings-neuroscience-and-the-whole-person/).
The latest research supports (https://neurosciencenews.com/brain-thinking-sensory-speed-28292/) an understanding of the slow brain but fast Mind.
This is so important for risk and safety that continues to think that training in brain cognition will improve safety. This is preached by safety sources with no expertise in neuroscience (https://safebraininitiative.com/; https://www.safetydimensions.com.au/whats-the-neuroscience-behind-safe-behaviour/; https://www.brainbasedsafety.nl/en/; https://safestart.com/videos/cristian-sylvestre/). Indeed, when you think that the brain is PPE, then you really have no idea of human cognition.
We have known about the slow brain and fast Mind for a long time, since (1991) the research of The User Illusion, Cutting Consciousness Down to Size by Norretranders (https://archive.org/details/userillusioncutt0000nrre).
What the research shows is that the brain processes information at about 10 bits a second whereas, the endocrine, nervous and immune systems process information at a billion bits a second. That’s 100 times faster than the speed of the brain. This was demonstrated years ago by Libet (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Libet) in 1983.
Indeed, the brain cannot process much of the data that is being fed into it from the many body systems that think for themselves. This is why when work is busy, 95% of all decision making is intuitive and based on heuristics. Unless we understand this we will never understand why accidents happen.
So, throwing training at the brain as if the brain makes decisions is simplistic erroneous nonsense peddled by safety engineers with no understanding of human embodiment. This is based on the silly metaphor that the brain is like a computer.
The brain doesn’t issue commands, it hosts conversations between bodily systems.
Even then, the many decisions are made via satisficing simply because the brain cannot optimise much of the data that is thrown at it.
Things in risk and safety are not going to improve as long as silly models of brain-centrism persist in the sector.
Decisions about risk and safety are not made by the brain!
I saw a silly post the other day from a safety crusader that stated that things are either safe or unsafe, and there was no in-between. This is the kind of nonsense we get from safety engineers who know nothing about cognition, learning, thinking or neuroscience.
95% of all decision making in risk involves doubt and uncertainty!
If you want to know about human judgement and decision making, don’t seek sources in safety.
The lastest research conducted in the laboratory of Markus Meister (PhD ’87), the Anne P. and Benjamin F. Biaggini Professor of Biological Sciences appeared in Neuron on December 17.
So, we know conclusively that accidents don’t come from poor brain thinking. And, any training that chases this assumption is a waste of time. Indeed, any paper-based safety processes that focus on brain thinking are also a waste of time.
What needs to happen is to shift thinking in risk and safety to an embodied understanding of human decision making. We study this in SPoR (https://cllr.com.au/product/embodiment-learning-and-risk-module-26/) and have a positive methodology and practical methods (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/spor-and-semiotics/) of what to do about it.
If you want to know more you can study this for free (https://safetyrisk.net/free-first-module-for-2025-embodiment-and-risk/) simply by registering here: admin@cllr.com.au
Dr Rob Long
Latest posts by Dr Rob Long (see all)
- The Learning Moment in Safety - May 20, 2025
- Heinrich’s Alternate Reality - May 19, 2025
- Heinrich Humbug - May 18, 2025
- When Semiotics Show Your Real Agenda in Safety - May 10, 2025
- Heinrich Was Wrong, A NZ Case Study - May 7, 2025
Matt Thorne says
And so all the Zero Harmers., all the absolutes, all the 100% guarantees that Risk and Safety promise are a tissue of lies.
Humans are not machines, are not linear, and are entirely unpredictable and you can never truly know a person.
Maybe 2025 is the year we can accept ‘People are Fallible’.
Rob long says
Hey Matt, in the church of Safety, there is no other leap than the leap of faith, belief in spin doctors, charlatans and slogan masters. There is no interest in research especially by the researchers of safety. The last thing any of them want is change.
What they want is more spin about learning from what goes right and nothing negative. No criticism needed in the world of safety theatre where the only performance in town are the Acts nominated by HOP.
As for fallibility, I hear that continues to be the swear word Safety doesn’t want to hear this year.