Lessons from a comparison of work domain models: Representational choices and their implications

Human Factors

Volumn 46, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 711-727

  Burns, Catherine M ^a,d,e   Bisantz, Ann M ^b,f,g   Roth, Emilie M ^c,h  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

^c Roth Cognitive Engineering   (United States)

^d University of Waterloo ^*  (Canada)

^e UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^f the State University of New York   (United States)

^g GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^h UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE WORK ANALYSIS; MILITARY COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEMS; WORK DOMAIN ANALYSIS (WDA); WORK DOMAIN MODELS;

COGNITIVE SYSTEMS; COMMAND AND CONTROL SYSTEMS; CONSTRAINT THEORY; JOB ANALYSIS; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; MILITARY OPERATIONS; SENSORS;

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH;

ALGORITHM; COGNITION; CONTROL SYSTEM; JOB ANALYSIS; MODEL; QUESTIONNAIRE; REVIEW; SENSOR; WORK ENVIRONMENT;

CHOICE BEHAVIOR; DECISION MAKING; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; PROBLEM SOLVING; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; WORK; WORK CAPACITY EVALUATION;

EID: 13144265745     PISSN: 00187208     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1518/hfes.46.4.711.56810     Document Type: Review

References (25)

1. Bisantz, A. M., Roth, E. M., Brickman, B., Gosbee, L. L., Hettinger, L., & McKinney, J. (2001). Integrating cognitive analyses into a large-scale system design process. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting (pp. 434-438). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
2. Bisantz, A. M., Roth, E. M., Brickman, B., Gosbee, L. L., Hettinger, L., & McKinney, J. (2003). Integrating cognitive analyses in a large-scale system design process. International Journal of Human Machine Studies, 58, 177-206.
3. Bisantz, A. M., & Vicente, K. J. (1994). Making the abstraction hierarchy concrete. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 40, 83-117.
4. Burns, C. M. (2000). Putting it all together: Improving integration in ecological displays, Human Factors, 42, 226-241.
5. Burns, C. M., Barsalou, E., Handler, C., Kuo, J., & Harrigan, K. (2000). A work domain analysis for network management. In Proceedings of the XIVth Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association and 44th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp. 1.469-1.472). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
6. Burns, C. M., Bryant, D. J., & Chalmers, B. A. (2000). A work domain model to support naval command and control. In Proceedings of the 2000 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (pp. 2228-2233). Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers.
7. Burns, C. M., Bryant, D. J., & Chalmers, B. A. (2001). Scenario mapping with work domain analysis. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting (pp. 424-428). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
8. Burns, C. M., Bryant, D. J., & Chalmers, B. A. (in press). Boundary, purpose, and values in work domain models: Models of naval command and control. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.
9. Chin, M., Sanderson, P., & Watson, M. (1999). Cognitive work analysis of the command and control work domain. In Proceedings of the 1999 Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (CCRTS) (Vol. 1, pp. 233-248). Newport, RI: U.S. Naval War College.
10. Flach, J. M., Eggleston, R., Kuperman, G., & Dominguez, C. (1998). SEAD and the UCAV: A preliminary cognitive systems analysis (Tech. Report AFLR-HE-WP-TR-1998-0013). Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH: Human Systems Effectiveness Directorate, Crew System Interface Division,.
11. Martinez, S. G., Talcott, C. P., Bennett, K. B., Stansifer, C., & Shattuck, L. (2001). Cognitive systems engineering analyses for army tactical operations. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting (pp. 523-526). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
12. Mazaeva, N., & Bisantz, A. M. (2003). Modeling automation within an abstraction hierarchy. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 47th Annual Meeting (pp. 649-652). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
13. Miller, C., & Vicente, K. J. (2001). Comparison of display requirements generated via hierarchical task and abstract on-decomposition space analysis techniques. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 5, 335-356.
14. Naikar, N., & Sanderson, P. M. (1999). Work domain analysis for training system definition and acquisition. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 9, 271-290.
15. Petersen, J., & Nielsen, M. (2001, September). Analyzing maritime work domains. Presented at the Eighth Conference on Cognitive Science Approaches to Process Control, Munich, Germany. Preprint retrieved November 5, 2004, from http://imv.au.dk/~pba/Preprints/CSAPC01.pdf
16. Potter, S. S., Elm, W. C., Roth, E. M., Gualtieri, J. W., & Easter, J. (2002). Using intermediate design artifacts to bridge the gap between cognitive analysis and cognitive engineering. In M. D. McNeese & M. A. Vidulich (Eds.), State of the art report (SOAR): Cognitive systems engineering in military aviation environments: Avoiding cogminutia fragmentosa! (pp. 137-168). Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, OH: Human Systems Information Analysis Center. Retrieved September 30, 2004, from http://iac.dtic.mil/hsiac/S- docs/SOAR-Apr02-Ch5.pdf
17. Potter, S. S., Roth, E. M., Woods, D. D. & Elm, W. (2000). Boot-strapping multiple converging cognitive task analysis techniques for system design. In J. M. Schraagen, S. F. Chipman, & V. L. Shalin (Eds.), Cognitive task analysis (pp. 317-340). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Rasmussen, J. (1985). The role of hierarchical knowledge representation in decision making and system management. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 15, 234-243.
19. Rasmussen, J., Pejtersen, A. M., & Goodstein, L. P. (1994). Cognitive systems engineering. New York: Wiley.
20. Reising, D. V. C., & Sanderson, P. M. (1996). Work domain analysis of a pasteurization plant: Using abstraction hierarchies to analyze sensor needs. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 40th Annual Meeting (pp. 293-297). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
21. Reising, D. V. C., & Sanderson, P. M. (2002). Work domain analysis and sensors: I. Principles and simple example. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 56, 569-596.
22. Roth, E. M., Lin, L., Kerch, S., Kenney, S. J., & Sugibayashi, N. (2001). Designing a first-of-a kind group view display for team decision making: A case study. In E. Salas & G. Klein (Eds.), Linking expertise and naturalistic decision making (pp. 113-135). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
23. Sanderson, P., Naikar, N., Lintern, G., & Goss, S. (1999). Use of cognitive work analysis across the system life cycle: From requirements to decommissioning. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 43rd Annual Meeting (pp. 318-322). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
24. Vicente, K. J. (1999). Cognitive work analysis: Towards safe, productive, and healthy computer-based work. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. Vicente, K. J., & Rasmussen, J. (1992), Ecological interface design: Theoretical foundations. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, SMC-22, 589-606.