Consciousness is what makes us most human. Because it feels so familiar, we rarely stop to reflect on it. We believe we understand consciousness, yet in reality we know very little about how it works. As a result, we sometimes develop safety policies that simply cannot work.
One such approach focuses on conscious action as a remedy for incidents. This sounds logical, but it ignores recent insights into how the brain actually functions. This article discusses those insights and explains how consciousness can be used effectively to promote safe behavior.
Defining consciousness: awareness of existence
Over time, many definitions of consciousness have been proposed. In this article, we deliberately choose the simplest one:
Consciousness is the awareness of one’s own existence or being.
It manifests as the awareness that one is thinking, perceiving, feeling, and acting. Consciousness is therefore distinct from those activities themselves. Thinking, perceiving, feeling, and acting belong primarily to the unconscious operations of our automatic pilot.
Consciousness versus the automatic pilot
The brain has a clear division of labor. The automatic pilot acts based on learned patterns, while consciousness observes those actions.
The automatic pilot ensures that our basic drives—such as survival and safety—are effectively expressed in the world. This forms the foundation of behavior. Consciousness, by contrast, can reflect independently of existing patterns and create new behavior. Consciousness becomes active primarily when the automatic pilot no longer has an adequate response.
What percentage of our behavior is conscious?
It is often assumed that 10–20% of our behavior is consciously driven. This estimate is comparable to looking at the world through green glasses and concluding that the world itself is green.
In reality, the percentage is much lower. Conscious processes contribute no more than about 1% to behavior. In other words, over 99% of all behavior is generated unconsciously by the automatic pilot.
The idea that humans are primarily conscious actors is therefore incorrect.
Example: driving a car
You have likely experienced this yourself. You drive home, arrive, and suddenly think: “Wait, I’m already here.” You have no memory of the last part of the trip. A quarter hour of your life seems missing from the movie.
During that time, your automatic pilot drove the car entirely on its own, without conscious involvement. This shows that even in complex and potentially dangerous situations, the automatic pilot is capable of acting safely.
New insight does not automatically lead to new behavior
New insights can quickly lead to other new insights. Behavior, however, works differently. Behavior is anchored in unconscious patterns. If we want to change behavior, we must rebuild those patterns.
Anyone who has tried to change a deeply ingrained habit knows how difficult this is. Because consciousness exerts so little control over behavior, the automatic pilot quickly takes over again—still running its old program. New insight rarely translates spontaneously into new behavior. Practice and repeated feedback are required. This is why we so often fall back into old habits.
Example: introducing hearing protection
Imagine a workshop where helmets are worn, but hearing protection is not. New machines increase noise exposure, so ear protection becomes mandatory when entering the workshop. This new rule is explained during a team meeting. The assumption is that new knowledge will lead to new behavior.
In practice, almost everyone still enters the workshop without hearing protection.
From a managerial perspective, this is often interpreted as unwillingness or resistance—something to be corrected through punishment. In reality, conscious awareness is simply not strong enough to intervene at the door of the workshop. The automatic pilot continues to run its old program and will only change through training and frequent feedback.
Consciousness has no fixed location in the brain
Unlike the automatic pilot, consciousness has no identifiable physical location in the brain. It cannot be seen on an MRI scan. Consciousness likely emerges from the interaction of multiple brain regions.
To function, consciousness must therefore borrow processing capacity from the automatic pilot. When we imagine something, for example, we use visual brain regions. This can create problems—especially when the automatic pilot is simultaneously using those same regions. Competition for neural resources reduces performance quality.
Conscious action is therefore not inherently safer. It can disrupt automated tasks and introduce safety risks. Well-automated behavior is often safer than conscious control.
Multitasking?
Can we multitask? Yes—as long as all tasks are handled by the automatic pilot. We can drive, listen to music, eat, and groom ourselves simultaneously.
Problems arise when we add a conscious task. Which brain regions consciousness borrows determines whether interference occurs.
Example: phone calls while driving
Talking on the phone while driving (there is no meaningful difference between handheld and hands-free calling) requires us to form a mental image of the person on the other end. Consciousness draws on visual processing capacity to do this.
Simulator studies show that drivers who are on the phone have significantly more difficulty processing visual information. Cyclists at the edge of the visual field are often missed, and drivers process less feedback about their own driving behavior.
It is therefore unsurprising that mobile phone use while driving causes at least 100 traffic fatalities and 20,000 serious injuries per year in the Netherlands. The disruptive effect on the automatic pilot is comparable to driving after consuming four alcoholic drinks.
One thing at a time
A key property of consciousness is that it is indivisible. It can focus on only one thing at a time. When we perform two conscious tasks simultaneously, we rapidly switch between them.
For complex tasks—such as interpreting control-panel data while holding a conversation—this requires repeatedly reloading working memory. This consumes time and energy and significantly reduces both performance quality and safety.
Poor task organization therefore increases safety risk.
“Work more consciously!”
The slogan “We need to work more consciously” sounds appealing, but it is impossible. If everything required conscious attention, we would come to a standstill.
Consciousness can handle only one task at a time; everything else must be delegated to the automatic pilot. What we can do is reduce unnecessary distraction and train the automatic pilot properly—by strengthening risk detection and building the skills needed to deal with risks effectively.
Want to learn more?
Several elements of this article are explored in greater depth in the book Safe Work Behavior by Brain Based Safety. For those seeking deeper understanding, the open training program will start again soon. In four days, participants are immersed in the core of this approach.
Juni Daalmans
January 2018