bluuebunny/crossref_metadata_2025_split huggingface dataset:
Human Factors in Incident Investigation
Authors: Armstrong Mark E. 
Published: January 2012

The Savannah River Site (SRS), located in South Carolina, is a key Department of Energy production and research facility for nuclear materials. Incident investigations performed at the Savannah River Site showed the cause of approximately 75% of all operating incidents in non-reactor facilities to be human error. The technical incident reporting system in place required the investigator to list the cause of an incident in broad terms (i.e., Personnel Error, Equipment Error) and to categorize it according to subclassifications (i.e., Operator Error, Supervisor Error, Mechanic Error). The reporting system, using these classifications, tended to emphasize “what happened” during an incident and “who was involved”, instead of getting to the details of “why” an incident occurred. The high rate of human error as the cause of incidents indicated that further analysis was in order. Human factors personnel in the Facility Safety Evaluation Section (FSES - an oversight organization with emphasis on non-reactor facilities) wanted to determine the causes of human error in a way that would identify more precisely why the errors occurred. To satisfy these needs, FSES is implementing a root cause analysis program for SRS. Root cause analysis consists of two parts; the first being Events and Causal Factor (E&CF) Charting; and the second, Root Cause Coding using a Root Cause Tree. The objectives were to provide a systematic method for identifying the root causes of a given incident in order to make detailed recommendations for preventing its recurrence, and to provide a database of incident root causes for identifying problem areas across incidents. Root cause analysis would guide the incident investigator to state “why” an incident occurred using detailed cause codes (e.g., Incomplete Training, Labels Less Than Adequate). Root cause trending would enable FSES to track the causes of human error, recommend solutions, and track corrective actions. FSES developed a one day workshop to train several hundred incident investigators at SRS to perform investigations using the root cause analysis method. This presentation will discuss the development and implementation of the root cause analysis system at SRS by FSES human factors professionals.
Problem Solving by Multiple Experts in a Distributed Diagnostic Context
Authors: Hoecker Douglas G. 
Published: January 2012

This paper outlines results, both behavioral and methodological, of a pilot study whose objective was to develop a method for learning why experienced technicians' diagnoses of a supposedly self-diagnostic avionics system appeared to be false at rates approaching 50%, and for recommending actions to improve diagnostic performance. In this context, the cost of falsely removing a replaceable avionics module was high: thorough testing of a false ‘pull’ typically would require the better part of a day for a skilled specialist using costly test equipment, only to conclude: ‘re-tests ok’. Fifteen subject-matter experts solved three problems concerning avionics diagnosis in a counterbalanced experimental design. Results from analysis of scored verbal protocols suggest a multiplicity of problem-solving strategies used both across as well as within individuals. They also suggest that an important factor in developing a problem-specific diagnostic strategy is the user's estimate of cost for obtaining the needed data; often the cost is estimated to be too high, and the data are foregone, even when they are believed to be available ‘somewhere in the system’. Thus, problem-solvers appeared to knowingly engage in risky decision-making behavior that reflected compromises among conflicting goals. Another result was methodological: the ‘leveraged expert’ approach to scenario-driven problem solving provides rich data and useful insights into dealing with multiple experts in a problem domain.
Designing Consumer Product Displays for the Disabled
Authors: Ward John T. 
Published: January 2012

In this portion of an on-going effort to develop human factors guidelines for designing consumer products for the disabled a series of interviews and surveys concerning information displays was conducted in the homes of noninstitutionalized disabled people. The study covered a variety of disabilities, and where possible, individuals with several different levels of a given disability were included. A detailed set of recommendations of specific displays for use on products to be used by disabled people proved impractical because interfaces which are found desirable by one disabled person are often a bad choice for another. It was found that good human factors design is especially appreciated by the disabled who, in general, are very smart consumers. The most significant display usability problem for the sensory disabled subject is the mix of displays often found on top-of-the-line products. There is a ‘space-age/jet cockpit' look which seems to be popular in display design; it is not popular with the disabled. The current fad toward displaying information on a wide variety of alternating channels is likely to cause a display to be rejected by a disabled customer. In its original military/cockpit use this design approach serves the purpose of preventing the overload of any one human input channel. On household, or public access, interfaces where the intensity of information display is relatively low the use of alternating display channels often insures that a user not able to sense one of the output technologies is unable to use the device.
Design Evaluations of Radial Arm Saws
Authors: Abedini Kamran 
Published: January 2012

Due to the recent do-it-yourself philosophy of marketing for general furniture and household items in addition to the actual financial savings associated with producing one's own items of need have increased the market for miniaturized production type equipment such as drill presses and radial arm saws. Thus far such equipment only existed in shops where they were only used by the professionals and the novice had only the least access to them. Due to the changes in the market, it has become evident that the design of such equipment should be monitored to ensure that all users are effectively considered in their design. This paper reviews the design of small production type equipments with emphasis on a typical radial arm saw. The actual operation of the saw is presented and the design problems are noted. The critique was based on several widely used human factors design criteria. Further specific solutions are provided for a redesign of the equipment. A mock-up of a newly designed saw is then presented where improvements are incorporated. Finally, a set of design criteria are established in order to provide the manufacturer of such production equipment with guidelines on how to economically improve the design for the user of their products. A videotape is produced in order to use human factors guidelines for evaluations of a radial arm saw. The tape also presents a 3 dimensional model of a redesigned saw. Acceptable humor was used throughout the production of the tape in order to increase the effectiveness of the presented material.
Static Force Exertion in Standardized, Functional and Free Postures
Authors: Daams Brechtje J. 
Published: January 2012

In assessing human force exertion, the use of standardized postures can lead to inaccurate prediction of the forces and postures which occur in everyday life. Force data obtained using postures freely chosen by the subjects themselves may therefore be considered more relevant. A carefully standardized posture, however, is generally considered to yield more reliable data. The question arose whether it would be possible to combine the two in some way, calling the result a “functional posture”. Research was necessary to determine a way of operationalizing these functional postures, and to test their reproducibility. First, a method is proposed to describe functional postures through explorative research. This includes the fixation of members that transfer force to the outside world, while the rest of the body is allowed to move freely. The results of further research show that the exerted force is reproducible in free, in functional, and in standardized posture. The difference in average force, though, is considerable and significant. The conclusion is that force exertion in free posture is most appropriate for design research.
The Development of Ergonomic Guidelines for Railroad Hand Switch Operation
Authors: Page George B. , McMahan Paul B. , Brown R. Todd , Kerk Carter J. 
Published: January 2012

Injury statistics and worker perceptions of relative task difficulty and frequency suggest that the operation of hand switch stands/switches may be a problem task in the railroad industry (Kuciemba, Page, and Kerk, 1988). Injuries associated with this task are mostly over exertion in nature, 43% of which occur to the lower back. This paper describes how we developed ergonomic guidelines specifically to address hand switch operation. These guidelines could be applied to: identify switches that may pose excessive risk of injury when operated, evaluate maintenance procedures, and assist in developing switch stand design alternatives. The guidelines specifically define hand forces across the range of switch lever motion encountered when operating the switch stand. There are two sets of guidelines, lower guidelines and upper guidelines. The lower guidelines are defined by the back compression and static strength criteria NIOSH (1981) uses to define their Action Limit, along with a stability criterion. The upper guidelines are defined by the same two criteria NIOSH (1981) uses to define their Maximum Permissible Limit, along with the stability criterion. We videotaped 20 workers operating 50 different switches at 3 different rail yards to classify worker methods into general categories. Then the postures associated with each of the general methods were recreated using 5th and 95th percentile workers, photographed, and digitized for use in the University of Michigan 3D Static Strength Prediction ProgramTM. For each posture, we then calculated the maximum hand forces that separately satisfied the lower and upper criteria. The maximum hand forces under the two sets of constraints define our guidelines.
MANPRINT Enhancement Methods: Organizational Change Process Review
Authors: Peters Joseph I. , Masterson Stephen P. , Hewitt Glen 
Published: January 2012

The Army has developed a program to improve the effectiveness of the systems it procures by considering human factors very early in the system acquisition cycle. This program is called “MANPRINT,” and was established in approximately 1985 as a top-down management initiative by the Chief Of Staff of the Army. MANPRINT is an acronym that stands for “MANpower and PeRsonnel INTegration.” The creation of MANPRINT within the Army has had a significant impact on both the structure of the Army organization and the procedures by which systems are acquired. The US Army has commissioned a study to evaluate the effectiveness of the MANPRINT study and to make recommendations for its enhancement. A major purpose of this study is to assess the degree to which the MANPRINT program has been adequately instituted and incorporated into the organizations and operations of the combat development and materiel acquisition communities. Another purpose is to evaluate the degree to which the MANPRINT program targets those who are accountable for design trade-off decisions involving MANPRINT issues, and the implications for improving MANPRINT. An organizational design of the MANPRINT program will be presented with positive and negative constructive criticism. Statistics describing the sample will be presented. A content analysis of interview results will be presented, and questionnaire results will be presented in appropriate graphical format. The presentation will conclude with recommendations for enhancing the MANPRINT organization.
Emerging Methodologies for the Assessment of Safety Related Product Communications
Authors: Rhoades Timothy P. , Frantz J. Paul , Miller James M. 
Published: January 2012

The analysis and prevention of accidents often addresses issues related to compliance with product usage and cautionary information found on the product and within its accompanying manual. The actual knowledge applied when using a product, however, likely comes from many other sources in addition to (or instead of) these sources. In cases where inappropriate knowledge is applied to the use of a product, an injury, property damage, or substandard output may occur. This being the case, the development of a product and its accompanying information should consider user knowledge and patterns of behavior in the absence or partial absence of printed product information. Contemporary guidelines for safety related communications, however, emphasize the physical features and content of product information rather than formal analysis of user characteristics. To address these concerns, this paper suggests methods which may be further developed and validated to predict product usage behaviors and user interpretation of product information. The authors present applications of word association methods, semantic features analysis, and script analysis using a case study approach. In situations where undesired behavior is predicted, the authors suggest that user analysis may often indicate countermeasures other than the simple addition or alteration of written product information.
Response Covariation as a Design Consideration in Developing Workplace Safety Interventions
Authors: Streff Fredrick M. , Kalsher Michael J. 
Published: January 2012

Accidents are among the leading causes of death in the U.S. and billions of dollars are expended annually for treatment of injuries, insurance costs, lost work-time, and other related costs (Accident Facts, 1989). Recent applications of interventions employing incentives and feedback have been successful in increasing safety-related behavior, but they are often expensive to administer over extended periods of time and their effects are often transient. Non-reward strategies emphasizing participation and commitment show great promise since they compare favorably to reward programs in terms of effectiveness, are less costly to administer, and in general, show stronger maintenance of effects. However, most studies employing commitment procedures have targeted only a single behavior, thus reducing their potential effectiveness. The notion of response classes suggests that certain safety behaviors may covary together and that interventions aimed at a single “target” behavior may also impact other “non-target” behaviors. The results of the present study show that safety glasses use (“target response”) increased following introduction of a pledgecard commitment intervention. A concomitant increase in safety belt use (“non-target response”) also occurred, although both safety behaviors eventually returned to baseline levels following termination of the intervention. The significance of these findings may prove valuable to the development of more efficient and cost-effective safety programs for promoting safety both on and off the job, especially when it is possible to predict collateral effects so that they may be promoted or prevented.
Designing Usable Documentation: New Directions for Human Factors
Authors: Angiolillo Joel S. 
Published: January 2012

The Human Factors community has virtually ignored one of the most important components of the extended user interface, user documentation. Last year at the 34th Annual Meeting in Orlando there was only one paper on either the design or use of documentation. By comparison, there were approximately a hundred papers related to screen design for video display terminals. The same disparity shows up in the Human Factors Journal. Last year there were no papers on documentation and eleven on accessing information from video display terminals. This lack of research in the human factors of documentation is surprising for several reasons: First, documentation is ubiquitous and it is big business. Just about every software package and every piece of hardware comes with its own manual today. Second, the importance of documentation to the usability of a product is not a secret. Alphonse Chapanis, in his presidential address delivered at the Eighth Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society, told the audience “A very large and important area of human factors engineering [has been] almost entirely neglected. This area consists of the language and the words that are attached to the tools, machines, systems, and operations with which we are concerned.” Third, there is no shortage of interesting applied research questions in this area. To name a few: — When and why do users turn to a manual? — Does format affect perceived usability? How? — How do people access information in a document? How can that access be made easier? — How do technical writers create technical instructions? — How can documentation be better integrated with online help and error support systems? Although all the participants on the panel have been actively studying the use of documentation, the focus of the panel will not be a recounting of past research. Rather the panelists will offer us direction, based on their extensive experience, for the next decade and beyond. Where are we going? What do we need to know so that we can build a science of documentation? Why have so many human factors practitioners shied away from documentation? How can we make significant improvements to the usability of documents? What form will the documentation of the year 2000 take, and how can human factors contribute to its usability?
Usability Testing: Where are We and Where are We Going?
Authors: Dumas Joseph S. 
Published: January 2012

Four years ago a group of usability test specialists held a panel discussion about this relatively new technique (“Usability testing in the real world,” Mills, 1987, SIGCHI Bulletin, 43–46). One of the objectives of that panel was to expose professionals in the usability community to testing methods. That panel assumed that the topic of testing would be new to its audience. Since that time, the number of laboratories that conduct tests has exploded. While no one seems to know for sure, there appear to be in excess of 100 labs in the U.S. alone. Yet, there is no formal organization for people who do testing. This panel session focuses on the current status of testing and its future. The panel will assume that the audience is at least somewhat familiar with the principles of testing. The primary objective of the panel is to make the case that usability testing is a method that is evolving and changing. It is changing because product development processes are changing and because its strengths and weaknesses are more obvious now. The panel's second objective is to provoke a discussion about usability testing and testing methods. The panel will focus on several themes: • Usability tests are becoming less formal. The typical evolution of a human factors method is that it becomes more structured and formal over time. Usability testers, however, have had to adapt to changes in the product development process. More functions than ever are being implemented in software. More flexible software tools have made it possible to withhold freezing the components of user interface until very late in the design process. Consequently, conducting quick, informal tests is becoming more typical because the formal test to verify usability often comes too late to influence the product design. • Usability testing is moving beyond testing the user interface itself. With the introduction of object-oriented programming and contextual design there is more interest in understanding users' cognitive processes. There is also renewed interest in understanding how testing fits with other methods for improving usability. • Usability testing can improve managerial and organizational process. Usability tests reveal more than just flaws in product designs. They also can identify problems in the design process. When test results point to poor management practices and groups that are not cooperating, they can lead to changes in the way organizations develop products. Viewed from this perspective, a usability test has benefits beyond the improvements to the product being tested. It can be used to evaluate management practices in addition to competence in applying effective technical practices.
Task-Based Modeling of the User Population of a Complex Interactive System Domain
Authors: Melder Karl , Hix Deborah 
Published: January 2012

This paper reports an investigation into issues concerning the user population for a complex interactive system domain, namely image processing. A variety of image processing systems are available, attempting to provide broad applicability, but are often complicated to understand and hard to use. One difficulty in producing an image processing system is defining its user population. In the image processing domain, this is a challenge because image processing has a diverse population of users, with great variances in user expertise and expectations. To better understand the process of classifying users of complex interactive systems, we conducted a study to define the user population of image processing systems, and to determine their common goals and tasks. First, we produced a task-based model of the user population of image processing systems, with levels in the model representing classes of tasks users perform with an image processing system. We then conducted a semi-structured interview and an ordering task to gather data to validate this model. Subjects were a broad variety of image processing users at Virginia Tech. We also had each subject complete a questionnaire to help identify common goals and tasks among image processing users. Results indicate validity of the model for classifying image processing user populations. Results provide the basis for continued research in a domain that requires highly flexible and adaptable interfaces to functionally complex systems. Further development of the model can provide image processing system developers with requirements for baseline functionality of an image processing system.
Now that You have a Usability Lab, How do you Make it Effective?
Authors: Mrazek Deborah , Cocklin Tom , Schumacher Robert , Virzi Robert , Chalupnik Kay 
Published: January 2012

Our presentation two years ago discussed how to design a Usability Lab. Now that you've done that, it's time to talk about how to use a Lab effectively. Our hope is that this session will let you walk away with new ideas, practical tips, things to avoid and a better understanding of how to get the most out of the investment you have made in building a Usability Lab. Our panel is made up of five people who currently manage Usability Labs. Discussion topics range from objective setting and data collection methods to how well the usability lab is received by development teams. Each panel member will focus on one of these aspects. Our intent is to combine formal presentations with audience discussion. In order to do this, we ask that you be prepared to help list specific areas of interest at the beginning of the session so that presenters can address these issues. Any topics not covered during the formal presentations will be used as the discussion topics for the end of the session.