Free Daily Podcast Summary
Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving: Daily Summaries Delivered
by Gareth Lock at The Human Diver
Human factors is a critical topic within the world of SCUBA diving, scientific diving, military diving, and commercial diving. This podcast is a mixture of interviews and 'shorts' which are audio versions of the weekly blog from The Human Diver. Each month we will look to have at least one interview and one case study discussion where we look at an event in detail and how human factors and non-technical skills contributed (or prevented) it from happening in the manner it did.
Latest Episodes
The most recent episodes — sign up to get AI-powered summaries of each one.
- 6 days ago17 min
SH308: We Know, and We Say Nothing
This episode explores why experienced divers still die in situations that seem predictable, using the tragic 2026 Maldives cave accident as a starting point. It looks at how outcome bias, the normalisation of deviance, nitrogen narcosis, group dynamics, and silent drift can gradually erode safety margins without divers realising it. Rather than focusing on individual mistakes, the discussion explains how everyday decisions, accepted norms, and human psychology combine to create risk over time. It also examines what divers, teams, and the wider diving community can do to recognise these patterns, challenge unsafe habits, encourage open communication, and build a culture that learns from accidents instead of simply accepting them as bad luck.Original blog: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/we-know-and-we-say-nothingNotesConcept formalised by Baron, J. & Hershey, J. C., "Outcome bias in decision evaluation," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54 (1988), p. 569-579. PDF available: https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~baron/papers/outcomebias.pdfVaughan, D., The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA, University of Chicago Press, 1996. Publisher page: https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo22781921.htmlLock, G., Under Pressure: Diving Deeper with Human Factors (2019); see also The Human Diver (https://www.thehumandiver.com) and the documentary If Only… (https://www.thehumandiver.com/ifonly).First systematic experimental demonstration: Behnke, A. R., Thomson, R. M. & Motley, E. P., "The psychologic effects from breathing air at 4 atmospheres pressure," American Journal of Physiology 112(3), 1935, p. 554-558. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1152/ajplegacy.1935.112.3.554For an overview, see Nitrogen Narcosis In Diving on StatPearls (NCBI/NIH): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470304/; and Clark, J. E., Moving in extreme environments: inert gas narcosis and underwater activities, Extreme Physiology & Medicine 3 (2014), which establishes that narcosis directly contributes to up to 6% of diving deaths — free full text: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4337274/Hamilton, K., Laliberté, M. F. & Fowler, B., "Dissociation of the behavioral and subjective components of nitrogen narcosis and diver adaptation," Undersea & Hyperbaric Medicine 22(1), March 1995, p. 41-49 (PMID 7742709): https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7742709/BibliographyDecision biases, normalisation of deviance, human factorsBaron, J. & Hershey, J. C., "Outcome bias in decision evaluation," Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54 (1988), p. 569-579. PDF: https://www.sas.upenn.edu/~baron/papers/outcomebias.pdfVaughan, D., The Challenger Launch Decision: Risky Technology, Culture, and Deviance at NASA, University of Chicago P
- 1 weeks ago15 min
SH307: 1. The 2026 HF in Diving Conference - What Did You Miss?
This episode explores how a restorative just culture can help the diving community respond to incidents in a way that promotes learning rather than blame. Instead of focusing only on who broke the rules, it looks at who was harmed, what they need, and how trust can be rebuilt while addressing the wider conditions that contributed to the event. The discussion covers the impact on everyone involved, the role of accountability, compassion, and forgiveness, and why repairing systems is more effective than simply punishing individuals. It also introduces Professor Sidney Dekker's Restorative Just Culture Checklist as a practical tool for turning difficult events into opportunities for meaningful learning and safer diving.Original blog: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/2026-hfid-conference-what-did-you-missTags: THD-English| THD-Education & Content Type| THD-HFiD-Conference
- 2 weeks ago4 min
SH306: Restorative Just Culture: Repairing Trust After an Event
This episode explores the difference between a retributive approach to diving incidents, which focuses on blame and punishment, and a restorative just culture, which focuses on learning, repair, and preventing future harm. It explains how incidents affect not only those directly involved but also instructors, organisations, and the wider diving community, and argues that real accountability means understanding what happened, supporting everyone affected, rebuilding trust, and fixing the conditions that allowed the event to occur. The discussion also introduces Professor Sidney Dekker's Restorative Just Culture Checklist as a practical tool for helping individuals and organisations move from blame to meaningful learning and lasting improvement.Original blog: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/restorative-just-cultureLinks: The PDF checklist: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Vkg0o4Fc8XWsAul-mkXNqD5lwokQ0ntP/view?usp=sharingTags: THD-English| THD-Education & Content Type
- 3 weeks ago9 min
SH305: Cause Reason. Excuse. Three Words Doing Three Very Different Things.
This episode explores an important distinction that is often missed when discussing diving incidents: the difference between a cause, a reason, and an excuse. A cause explains what contributed to an event, a reason explains why a person's actions made sense to them at the time, and an excuse uses those reasons to avoid accountability. Understanding these differences helps us learn from accidents without simply assigning blame or letting people off the hook. The discussion shows why complex incidents usually have many interacting causes, why understanding local decision-making is essential for improving safety, and how separating learning from punishment leads to better conversations, stronger investigations, and safer diving for everyone.Original blog: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/cause-reason-excuseLinks: Accountability blog: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/we-want-accountabilityRaDonda Vaught case: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/the-structure-is-normal-the-scale-is-notStop rules blog: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/why-investigations-stop-where-they-stopRichard Cook’s diagram: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/joining-dots-is-easy-if-you-know-the-outcomeMore about the RaDonda Vaught case: https://humanfactors101.com/2022/05/08/is-human-error-a-crime/The eight question review: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/eight-questions-about-maldives-accident“Learning” the same lessons: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/why-does-nothing-changeTags: THD-English| THD-Learning, Incidents & Just Culture
- Aug 19, 202617 min
SH304: Why Investigations Stop Where They Stop
This episode explores why accident investigations often stop long before they uncover the full picture. Drawing on research from safety science, it argues that the “cause” of an incident is not simply discovered—it is shaped by who is investigating, what they are able to change, and what explanations their community accepts. In diving, investigations often focus on the actions of individual divers or instructors because these are the easiest problems to address, while deeper issues such as organisational culture, commercial pressures, and industry practices are left unexplored. The episode examines how different people can interpret the same event in very different ways, why every investigation helps shape the community’s understanding of safety, and why asking “Why did the investigation stop here?” can lead to far richer learning than simply accepting the reported cause.Original blog: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/why-investigations-stop-where-they-stopLinks: The most complete data on diving fatalities from 2008: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19175195/Blog exploring the purposes of running an investigation: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/what-is-the-purpose-of-an-investigationLFEO program: https://www.thehumandiver.com/lfeoHFiD conference: https://www.hf-in-diving-conference.com/What you look for is what you find: https://doi-org.ludwig.lub.lu.se/10.1016/j.ssci.2009.01.004What you find is what you fix: https://doi-org.ludwig.lub.lu.se/10.1016/j.aap.2010.07.003Blog about agency/organisation standards: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/beyond-the-floorSpeaking truth to power: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/when-im-fine-isnt-trueStructural conditions that produce decisions: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/the-structure-is-normal-the-scale-is-notOther references:Blazsin, H. & Guldenmund, F. (2015). The social construction of safety: Comparing three realities. Safety Science, 71, 16–27.Lundberg, J., Rollenhagen, C. & Hollnagel, E. (2009). What-You-Look-For-Is-What-You-Find — The consequences of underlying accident models in eight accident investigation manuals. Safety Science, 47(10), 1297–1311.Lundberg, J., Rollenhagen, C. & Hollnagel, E. (2010). What you find is not always what you fix — How other aspects than causes of accidents decide recommendations for remedial actions. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 42, 2132–2139.Rasmussen, J. (1990). Human error and the problem of causality in analysis of accidents. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B, 327, 449–462.Rochlin, G. I. (1999). Safe operation as a social construct. Ergonomics, 42(11), 1549–1560.Shreeves, K., Buzzacott, P., Hornsby, A., & Caney, M. (2018). Violations of safe diving practices among 122 diver fatalities. Int. Marit. Health, 69(2), 94–98. https://doi.org/10.5603/imh.2018.0014van der Schaaf, T. W., Lucas, D. A. & Hale, A. R. (1991). Near miss reporting as a safety tool. Butterworth-Heinemann.Tags: THD-English| THD-Learning, Incidents & Just Culture</p
- Aug 12, 202613 min
SH303: The Structure of This Diving Tragedy Was Not Abnormal. The Scale Was.
This episode explores why diving accidents are so often explained by individual mistakes instead of the wider conditions that made those mistakes possible. Using the case of a fatal medication error in healthcare alongside the recent Maldives cave diving tragedy, it examines how hindsight, blame, and our natural tendency to focus on people rather than systems can prevent meaningful learning. The discussion highlights how unsafe practices can become normal when they repeatedly appear to work, and why serious accidents often reveal long-standing weaknesses that existed long before the final event. Rather than asking "Who is at fault?", the episode argues that the better question is "What conditions made these decisions seem reasonable at the time?"—because understanding those conditions offers the best chance of preventing similar tragedies in the future.Original blog: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/the-structure-is-normal-the-scale-is-notLinks: Martin Anderson’s write-up: https://humanfactors101.com/2022/05/08/is-human-error-a-crime/Andrzej Gornicki’s Eight Question Review: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/eight-questions-about-maldives-accidentGareth’s blog about accountability: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/we-want-accountabilityAssumptions and worn paths: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/why-rules-get-brokenConsensus is because people don’t want to disagree: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/beyond-the-floorConditions produce outcomes: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/what-conditionsUseful illegality in action: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/why-rules-get-brokenTags: THD-English| THD-Learning, Incidents & Just Culture
- Aug 5, 202617 min
SH302: Why Rules Get Broken. Does It Matter Who Is Breaking Them?
This episode explores why rule-breaking in diving is often more complicated than simply “breaking the rules.” It looks at the difference between shortcuts that organisations quietly depend on to keep operating and personal shortcuts taken for convenience or ego. Through real-world examples, the discussion explains how hindsight can unfairly turn system-wide problems into individual blame after an incident occurs. The episode also examines why teams often stay silent when they notice problems, how social pressure affects decision-making, and why genuine learning requires understanding the reality of how diving actually works rather than relying on simple explanations. Ultimately, it challenges divers, instructors, and leaders to recognise the difference between necessary adaptations and risky personal shortcuts before something goes wrong.Original blog: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/why-rules-get-brokenLinks: Blog about how conditions shape actions: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/what-conditionsMaster thesis about storytelling to learn: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/msc-part-1-the-problem-spaceGuide to speaking truth to power: https://www.thehumandiver.com/resourcesTags: THD-English| THD-Learning, Incidents & Just Culture
- Aug 1, 202633 min
SH301: Eight Questions About the Maldives Dive Accident
This episode examines the deaths of five Italian divers in the Maldives and a Maldivian military diver who later died during the recovery operation, using the tragedy to explore how Just Culture approaches accidents in high-risk environments. Rather than rushing to blame individuals, the discussion walks through the Eight-Question Review framework, which looks first at the wider system: authority, procedures, training, resources, organisational culture, operational norms, and the pressures influencing decisions. The episode highlights how experienced scientific divers can still face hidden competence gaps when moving into technical cave environments, how commercial and research pressures can shape risk-taking, and how safety rules may drift away from everyday practice over time. It also explores the dangers of hindsight bias and why meaningful investigations must focus on understanding how decisions made sense to those involved at the time, not simply judging outcomes after the fact. The central message is that accidents rarely come from one bad decision alone, but from interacting conditions within a wider system—and that real learning only happens when we are willing to ask difficult questions before assigning blame.Original blog: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/eight-questions-about-maldives-accidentLinks: Blog about the Chac Mool deaths: https://www.thehumandiver.com/post/chac-mool-triple-diving-fatalityFurther reading on The Human Diver:Change your Language, Change the WorldThey Lost Situation AwarenessThe Eight-Question Review — LFEO courseTags: THD-English| THD-Learning, Incidents & Just Culture
About Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving
Human factors is a critical topic within the world of SCUBA diving, scientific diving, military diving, and commercial diving. This podcast is a mixture of interviews and 'shorts' which are audio versions of the weekly blog from The Human Diver. Each month we will look to have at least one interview and one case study discussion where we look at an event in detail and how human factors and non-technical skills contributed (or prevented) it from happening in the manner it did.
Customized Recaps
AI-powered recaps with compact key takeaways, quotes, and insights.
Straight to Your Inbox
Get key takeaways from Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving in a 5-minute read.
Save Hours Every Week
Stay current on your favorite podcasts without falling behind.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Podzilla's Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving daily summary?
It's a free AI-powered email that summarizes new episodes of Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving as soon as they're published. You get the key takeaways, notable quotes, and links & mentions — all in a quick read.
How does the Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving podcast summary work?
When a new episode drops, our AI transcribes and analyzes it, then generates a personalized summary tailored to your interests and profession. It's delivered to your inbox every morning.
Is this an official Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving product?
No. Podzilla is an independent service that summarizes publicly available podcast content. We're not affiliated with or endorsed by Gareth Lock at The Human Diver.
Can I get summaries of other podcasts too?
Absolutely! The free plan covers up to 3 podcasts. Upgrade to Pro for 15, or Premium for 50. Browse our full catalog at /podcasts.
How often does Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving release new episodes?
Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving publishes 2x weekly. Our AI generates a summary within hours of each new episode.
What topics does Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving cover?
Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving covers topics including Education, Sports, Culture, Society & Culture. Our AI identifies the specific themes in each episode and highlights what matters most to you.
Start getting Counter-Errorism in Diving: Applying Human Factors to Diving summaries tomorrow morning.
Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.
Free forever for up to 3 podcasts. No credit card required.