Gemma Read
Professor of Psychology, School of Health - Psychology
Director, Centre for Human Factors and Systems Science
Email: gread@usc.edu.au
Telephone: +61 7 5456 5296
Location: Sunshine Coast, SD-IC-1-1.26
Profile
Associate Professor Gemma Read is the Director of the Centre for Human Factors and Systems Science at UniSC. She gained her PhD in Human Factors from Monash University and holds undergraduate degrees in Behavioural Science and Law.
Gemma’s research applies theories and methods from Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE), systems science and safety science to enhance safety, health and wellbeing.
Research
Publications
Journal article | Peer reviewed
Investigating acceptance of current and future artificial intelligence systems for suicide prevention ↗
by Brianna Ivory, Paul Salmon, Gemma Read and Jolene A Cox
18 March 2026
AI & Society
Suicide is a leading cause of premature mortality worldwide, making suicide prevention a global public health priority. As more Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based suicide prevention interventions are being developed and implemented, it is important to study acceptance of these AI systems. The present study aimed to investigate the factors that predict acceptance of current and future AI systems for suicide prevention and the perceived risks and benefits of these AI systems. Individuals from the Australian public were invited to participate in an online survey, which included six hypothetical scenarios of current AI systems (Artificial Narrow Intelligence [ANI]) and future advanced AI systems (Artificial General Intelligence [AGI]) for suicide prevention. Participants evaluated these scenarios on five technology acceptance factors (performance expectancy, effort expectancy, social influence, facilitating conditions, trust) and elaborated on its perceived risks and benefits. Performance expectancy, social influence, and trust predicted acceptance of ANI systems, but only trust predicted acceptance of AGI systems. Overall, the level of acceptance was higher for ANI systems than for AGI systems. Several perceived risks (e.g., risks to mental healthcare, distrust in AI, threats to humanity) and perceived benefits (e.g., benefits to mental healthcare, trust in AI, human help-seeking) were identified. AI systems represent potential avenues for effective suicide prevention. However, to ensure acceptance, AI systems for suicide prevention must be developed in a way that is safe, reliable, and trustworthy.
Journal article | Peer reviewed
The big five model of teamwork and human autonomy teams: a scoping review ↗
by Shayne Loft, Jason Thompson, Nancy Cooke, Eduardo Salas, Gemma J M Read, Brandon King, Paul M Salmon, Darcie Hall and Scott McLean
2026
Applied Ergonomics
Teams play a critical role in society and represent a key area for Human Factors and Ergonomics. Salas et al.'s Big Five model is widely cited; however, the increasing use of Human-Autonomy Teams (HATs) has fuelled debate over its continued relevance. It is important to reflect on how the Big five model has been applied, in what contexts, and whether applications to contemporary teams are emerging. This article presents the findings from a scoping review undertaken to identify and synthesise the peer reviewed literature describing applications of the Big Five model. Articles were deemed eligible for inclusion if they were published in the peer reviewed literature and described an application of the Big Five model to study teamwork. 38 articles were included in the review and no applications of the Big Five model to study HATs were identified. Over half of the studies were undertaken in healthcare and a range of assessment methods have been used (e.g., questionnaires, surveys, interviews, observer-rating scales, communication transcript analysis). Just under a third of included studies evaluated all model components (i.e., the five processes and three coordinating mechanisms) and few considered the relationships between model components or between model components and team effectiveness. Research is required to explore the validity of the Big Five model for HATs, to gather evidence for the relationship between model components and team effectiveness, and to develop more precise Big five-based measures.Teams play a critical role in society and represent a key area for Human Factors and Ergonomics. Salas et al.'s Big Five model is widely cited; however, the increasing use of Human-Autonomy Teams (HATs) has fuelled debate over its continued relevance. It is important to reflect on how the Big five model has been applied, in what contexts, and whether applications to contemporary teams are emerging. This article presents the findings from a scoping review undertaken to identify and synthesise the peer reviewed literature describing applications of the Big Five model. Articles were deemed eligible for inclusion if they were published in the peer reviewed literature and described an application of the Big Five model to study teamwork. 38 articles were included in the review and no applications of the Big Five model to study HATs were identified. Over half of the studies were undertaken in healthcare and a range of assessment methods have been used (e.g., questionnaires, surveys, interviews, observer-rating scales, communication transcript analysis). Just under a third of included studies evaluated all model components (i.e., the five processes and three coordinating mechanisms) and few considered the relationships between model components or between model components and team effectiveness. Research is required to explore the validity of the Big Five model for HATs, to gather evidence for the relationship between model components and team effectiveness, and to develop more precise Big five-based measures.
Journal article | Peer reviewed
The good, the bad, and the lost: a meta-analysis of rail signal passed at danger incident investigations using AcciMaps and systems thinking ↗
by Anjum Naweed, Teal Evans, Gemma Read, Paul Salmon and Brian Thoroman
2026
Safety Science
Signal Passed at Danger (SPAD) incidents, though infrequent, remain a serious threat to rail safety. While often investigated as discrete operational events, SPADs are symptomatic of deeper system conditions. Investigations tend to follow linear logics of human error and focus corrective actions on individual behaviour—especially that of the train driver. However, such approaches may obscure rather than reveal meaningful system-wide learning. This meta-analysis used the AcciMap technique to analyse and aggregate findings from SPAD investigation reports (N = 49), offering a unique holistic perspective. A total of 859 contributory factors were identified (∼17 per SPAD), with most (∼62 %) reported to occur at the level of physical processes and actor activities. The largest aggregate contributory factor being attributed to SPADs was driver cognitive (dis)engagement (63 factors). Thematic aggregation revealed four themes: (1) A signal lost in the noise, relating to information overload in the rail environment and inevitable separation of human attention from signals; (2) Lost in translation, highlighting interchangeable and indistinct use of labels and concepts employed during investigation; (3) Lost in the brake down, reflecting a dominant narrative of driver (in)action and wrong-doing; and (4) Lost in the loop, pointing to surface-level corrective actions that repeated what was expected rather than redesign ineffective controls. Findings are discussed by reflecting on the question: “what might SPADs be trying to teach us?” By shifting the analytical lens from individual to system, this study challenges dominant narratives of driver blame and considers whether current investigations genuinely reflect systems thinking or merely perpetuate an illusion of learning.
Report
Human Factors guidance to support innovative level crossing safety solutions: Final report September 2025 ↗
by Gemma Read, Zohre Abedi, Jolene A Cox and Paul Salmon
2025
Level crossings, where road and rail intersect, pose significant safety risks to train drivers, road users, pedestrians, and cyclists (Edquist et al., 2009; Read et al., 2021). From 2014 to 2022, 322 collisions at Australian level crossings resulted in 39 fatalities and 49 serious injuries (National Level Crossing Safety Committee, 2023; Read et al., 2021). Beyond the significant human and social costs, collisions at level crossings impose a considerable economic burden, with the annual financial cost estimated to exceed AUD $116 million in 2010 (Tooth & Balmford, 2010). Human Factors issues play a critical role in level crossing collisions (Beanland et al., 2018; Salmon, Read, et al., 2013). Collisions can occur because road users misjudge the speed or distance of an approaching train, rely on past experience to anticipate train movements, or fail to perceive warnings or even trains due to low expectancy (Caird, 2002; Office of the National Rail Safety Regulator, 2024; Salmon, Lenné, et al., 2013; Salmon, 2013; Young, 2015). Studies show that both active crossings (e.g., boom gates, flashing lights) and passive crossings (e.g., stop signs, no warning systems) present risks, with user behaviour shaped by the physical and informational environment (Lenné et al., 2011; Read et al., 2021). Despite substantial research, Human Factors knowledge has not been systematically integrated into level crossing design and evaluation, particularly in rural and regional areas where passive controls dominate (Bearman, 2013). Given the costs associated with installing traditional active controls, there is growing interest in innovative, low-cost safety solutions (Silla, 2019; Wullems, 2011). However, developers, engineers, and project managers often lack practical guidance on applying Human Factors principles during the design, implementation, and operation of these solutions. This gap can reduce the effectiveness of interventions. This project addresses the gap through the development of a publicly accessible, evidence-based toolkit to help embed Human Factors principles into the design, implementation, and operation of innovative level crossing safety solutions.
Journal article | Peer reviewed
Applying systems thinking to understand the impacts of traffic safety culture on young driver speeding behaviour ↗
by Paul Salmon, Caitlin Taylor and Gemma Read
2025
Journal of Traffic and Transportation Engineering
Young driver safety remains a road safety priority due to the over-representation of this cohort in crashes, fatalities and injuries. Speeding is recognised as a key contributor to traffic crashes, particularly within this population. Traffic safety culture is a growing area of research that considers the shared attitudes, values and beliefs of communities relating to road safety behaviours. However, the traffic safety culture of young drivers is under-researched and has not been conceptualised for speeding behaviour specifically. The current study applied an exploratory approach paired with systems thinking to discern the traffic safety culture of young drivers in Queensland, and in sub-groups of young drivers (general population females, general population males and car enthusiasts). Further, factors across the road transport system were investigated for their impact on traffic safety culture and speeding behaviour. A sample of 27 young drivers from Queensland participated in semi-structured interviews. Thematic analysis revealed key factors of a general traffic safety culture that exist across the young driver groups. Further, the findings showed that factors across the whole road transport system impact young drivers’ traffic safety culture to varying degrees. The findings provide insight into how the system could be adapted to encourage safer behaviour in young drivers. It is suggested that a holistic approach spanning the road transport system be applied to integrate strategies which promote a positive traffic safety culture around speeding within the young driver cohort.
Explore all Gemma Read's publications in UniSC Research Bank
Grants
23 February 2026
Level Crossing Behavioural Assessment - Separation Street, North Geelong
Victorian Department of Transport and Planning
Grant no. 0980031720.
Paul Salmon and Gemma Read
6 February 2026
Level Crossing Behavioural Assessment - Davey Drive / Waterloo Road Trafalgar
Victorian Department of Transport and Planning
Grant no. 0980031719.
Paul Salmon and Gemma Read
2 February 2026
An integrated risk assessment and incident reporting and learning system
Australian Research Council (Australia, Canberra) - ARC
Grant no. LP240200866.
Gemma Read, Jolene Cox, Clare Dallat, Scott McLean, Caroline Finch and Paul Salmon
1 November 2025
Centre of Research Excellence in Human Factors and AI-enabled Clinical Decision Support
National Health and Medical Research Council (Australia, Canberra) - NHMRC
Grant no. 2044785.
Gemma Read, Sarah Hilmer, Magda Raban, Mirela Prgomet, Tom Snelling, Amina Tariq, Melissa Baysari, Robyn Clay-Williams, Andrew Georgiou and Paul Salmon
3 February 2025 - 29 August 2025
Level crossing camera PoC human factors evaluation
Queensland Department of Transport and Main Roads (Australia, Brisbane) - TMR
Grant no. 0980030383.
Paul Salmon, Zohre Abedi and Gemma Read
15 September 2022 - 30 June 2025
A Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service system digital twin decision support model
University of the Sunshine Coast (Australia, Sunshine Coast) - UniSC
Grant no. 0980027688.
Gemma Read, Scott McLean and Paul Salmon
6 June 2025
Level Crossing Behavioural Assessment - Kilgour Street, Geelong
Victorian Department of Transport and Planning
Grant no. 0980030760.
Paul Salmon and Gemma Read
22 May 2025
Proof of Concept: A tool for automating level crossing traffic counts
Victoria Department of Transport
Grant no. 0980030618.
Abigail Koay, David Alonso-Caneiro, Rania Shibl and Gemma Read
12 March 2025
Level Crossing Behavioural Assessment - Anderson Street, Yarraville
Victorian Department of Transport and Planning
Grant no. 0980030445.
Paul Salmon and Gemma Read
11 March 2025
Level Crossing Behavioural Assessments - Donnybrook Road, Donnybrook & 2025 Site Comparison
Victorian Department of Transport and Planning
Grant no. 0980030446.
Paul Salmon and Gemma Read
Explore all Gemma Read's grants in UniSC Research Bank
Teaching and supervision
Supervision
Masters Thesis Supervision - Completed
Power and teamwork: Applying systems thinking to understand and prevent medication management failures in hospitals. ↗
Students: Erin Stevens
Associated Researchers: Gemma Read and Paul Salmon
2024 - 10 March 2026
Healthcare teams comprise of clinical and other professional staff who perform a range of tasks critical to patient safety and quality of care, often under conditions of time pressure and high workload. Communication failures within healthcare teams are a major factor contributing to adverse medical events across Australian and international healthcare contexts. Power relationships (real or perceived) between and among professional healthcare groups have been shown to be a significant factor contributing to communication failures and teamwork breakdowns. However, despite substantial research undertaken to improve communication and teamwork skills within healthcare teams across a variety of settings, there is currently limited research that has examined the impact of power on team performance, and patient safety. Further, existing research has not used approaches that are able to model the complexity of teamwork in healthcare, and how teamwork can fail. This thesis addresses this gap by applying systems thinking approaches to: a) understand power relationships within multidisciplinary healthcare teams; b) analyse the impacts of power on team performance; and c) forecast the risks associated with teamwork breakdowns in healthcare teams. This will provide a better understanding of the role of power in accident causation within the healthcare domain. To address these aims, the research described in this thesis involved the following research tasks: 1) A systematic literature review of theoretical concepts and key issues related to power and team performance in healthcare; 2) Application of the Event Analysis of Systemic Teamwork (EAST; Stanton, 2013) method to identify power in the task, social and information networks of the hospital medication management system; 3) Application of the Event Analysis of Systemic Teamwork-Broken Links method (EAST-BL; Stanton & Harvey, 2017) to forecast the potential impacts of teamwork breakdowns, including the influence of power, by breaking network linkages within the hospital medication management system. The key theoretical contribution of this thesis is the first application of systems theory for the purposes of understanding teamwork breakdown, including the influence of power, in healthcare. The key methodological contribution of this thesis lies in the application of systems thinking approaches to both understand, analyse and forecast the impact of teamwork failures, including power, on team performance in healthcare. Finally, the practical contributions of this research include an improved understanding of how teamwork breakdown, including power, impacts performance within healthcare and proposes a set of mitigation strategies. This information could be used to inform the design of interventions to address teamwork and power-related issues in healthcare settings to improve team performance, and ultimately patient safety.
Doctoral Thesis Supervision - Completed
Anticipating System Safety Performance: System-Level Safety Leading Indicators
Students: Elizabeth Grey
Associated Researchers: Paul Salmon and Gemma Read
1 May 2014 - 15 May 2025
Doctoral Thesis Supervision - Completed
Using Distributed Situation Awareness to Understand and Enhance Multi-Agency Emergency Response to Natural Disasters
Students: Alison O'Brien
Associated Researchers: Paul Salmon and Gemma Read
1 February 2018 - 1 March 2025
Doctoral Thesis Supervision - Current
Developing and testing systems thinking-based leading indicators for nuclear safety.
Students: Research student (name withheld)
Associated Researchers: Paul Salmon and Gemma Read
2025
Doctoral Thesis Supervision - Current
Navigating Complexity: Metacognitive Awareness And Instruction For Enhanced Decision Making In Human-Ai Collaboration
Students: Research student (name withheld)
Associated Researchers: Paul Salmon and Gemma Read
2025
Explore all Gemma Read's supervisions in UniSC Research Bank
Professional
Education
PhD
Monash University (Australia, Melbourne)
PGDipPsych
Monash University (Australia, Melbourne)
LLB/BBSc
LaTrobe University