# Research on the Influence of Anxiety Psychology on Unsafe Behavior Among Construction Workers
## 4 Model Validation and Result Analysis
### Correlation Analysis  
Correlation analysis, a statistical method, quantifies and evaluates the existence and strength of associations between variables. To examine the linear relationship between construction workers' anxiety psychology and unsafe behaviors--specifically, whether the correlation is positive or negative--this study employed SPSS 22.0 to analyze variable data and compute Pearson correlation coefficients (denoted as r). The results are presented in Table 5. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) measures the linear relationship between two continuous variables, ranging from \(-1\) to \(1\). The absolute value of r indicates the strength of the correlation, while its sign reflects the direction. A value between 0 and 1 signifies a positive correlation (i.e., variables increase concurrently), whereas a value between \(-1\) and 0 indicates a negative correlation (i.e., variables exhibit inverse trends).  
As shown in Table 5, the Pearson correlation coefficient between anxiety psychology and unsafe behaviors is 0.498 (\(p\) < 0.01), confirming a significant positive correlation. This implies that fluctuations in anxiety psychology directly influence the likelihood of unsafe  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Constructs** & **Items** & **Std. FL** & **SMC** & **S.E** & **CR** & **AVE** \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Anxiety Psychology} & A1 & 0.758 & 0.626 & 0.278 & \multirow{3}{*}{0.891} & \multirow{3}{*}{0.628} \\  & A2 & 0.811 & 0.638 & 0.334 & & \\  & A3 & 0.845 & 0.577 & 0.291 & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Organizational Climate} & O1 & 0.732 & 0.612 & 0.264 & \multirow{3}{*}{0.842} & \multirow{3}{*}{0.667} \\  & O2 & 0.797 & 0.633 & 0.336 & & \\  & O3 & 0.767 & 0.512 & 0.285 & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Safety Competency} & C1 & 0.801 & 0.533 & 0.364 & \multirow{3}{*}{0.869} & \multirow{3}{*}{0.634} \\  & C2 & 0.713 & 0.523 & 0.322 & & \\  & C3 & 0.725 & 0.565 & 0.318 & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Job Satisfaction} & S1 & 0.811 & 0.561 & 0.285 & \multirow{3}{*}{0.823} & \multirow{3}{*}{0.629} \\  & S2 & 0.762 & 0.613 & 0.281 & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & S3 & 0.765 & 0.541 & 0.326 & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & S4 & 0.773 & 0.546 & 0.261 & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & S5 & 0.783 & 0.576 & 0.253 & & \\ \hline \multirow{3}{*}{Unsafe Behaviors} & B1 & 0.854 & 0.711 & 0.283 & \multirow{3}{*}{0.878} & \multirow{3}{*}{0.548} \\  & B2 & 0.821 & 0.562 & 0.301 & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & B3 & 0.712 & 0.651 & 0.313 & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & B4 & 0.756 & 0.638 & 0.345 & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & B5 & 0.743 & 0.522 & 0.292 & & \\ \cline{1-1}  & B6 & 0.698 & 0.579 & 0.340 & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 4: CFA and reliability analysis results.  
behaviors. Organizational climate (r = \(-\)0.472, \(p\) < 0.01), safety competency (r = \(-\)0.442, \(p\) < 0.01), and job satisfaction (r = \(-\)0.413, \(p\) < 0.01) all demonstrate significant negative correlations with unsafe behaviors. Among these variables, organizational climate exhibits the strongest negative association, suggesting that a harmonious organizational climate directly reduces the incidence of unsafe behaviors.