Object worlds in work domain analysis: A model of naval damage control

IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part A:Systems and Humans

Volumn 38, Issue 5, 2008, Pages 1030-1040

  Torenvliet, Gerard L ^a   Jamieson, Greg A ^b   Chow, Renée ^c  

^a Human Factors Engineering Group   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c DEFENCE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CANADA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Abstraction hierarchy; Naval damage control; Object worlds; Work domain analysis

Indexed keywords

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; CLARIFICATION;

ABSTRACTION HIERARCHY; NAVAL DAMAGE CONTROL; OBJECT WORLDS; WORK DOMAIN ANALYSIS;

MODAL ANALYSIS;

EID: 51449083132     PISSN: 10834427     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/TSMCA.2008.2001058     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Leadmark: The Navy's Strategy for 2020. Canadian Forces. [Online]. Available: http://www.navy.dnd.ca/leadmark/doc/index_e.asp
2. Securing Canada's Ocean Frontier: Charting the Course From Leadmark Canadian Forces. [Online]. Available: http://www.navy.forces.gc.ca/mspa_video-media/Securing_Canada_E.pdf
3. United States General Accounting Office, "Navy actions needed to optimize ship crew size and reduce total ownership costs," U.S. Gen. Accounting Off., Washington, DC, Rep. GAO-03-250, 2003.
4. J. Schank, R. Yardley, J. Riposo, H. Thie, E. Keating, M. Arena, H. Pung, J. Birkler, and J. Chiesa, Options for Reducing Costs in the United Kingdom's Future Aircraft Carrier (CVF) Programme. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corp., 2005.
5. P. S. Hamburger, J. R. Bost, and J. A. McKneely, "Optimized crewing for surface ships," in Proc. Naval Surf. Warfare Tech. Dig., 1999, pp. 204-215.
6. J. A. Hiltz, "Damage control and crew optimization," Defence R&D Canada-Atlantic, Dartmouth, NS, Canada, Def. Res. Devel. Canada-Atlantic Tech. Memo. TM-2005-010, 2005.
7. J. A. Hiltz, Damage control and optimized manning - The DRDC-Atlantic perspective, 2005, Dartmouth, NS, Canada: Defence R&D Canada-Atlantic.
8. J. M. C. Schraagen, "Requirements for a damage control decision-support system: Implications from expert-novice differences," in Naturalistic Decision Making, C. Zsambok and G. Klein, Eds. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1996, pp. 315-322.
9. T. E. Miller, A. A. Armstrong, S. L. Wiggins, A. Brockett, A. Hamilton, and L. Schieffer, "Damage control decision support: Reconstructing shattered situation awareness," Naval Surface Warfare Center, Dahlgren, VA, 2002. Final Tech. Rep., Contract N00178-00-C-3041.
10. E. Runnerstrom, "Human systems integration and shipboard damage control," Naval Eng. J., vol. 115, no. 4, pp. 71-79, 2003.
11. C. M. Burns, D. J. Bryant, and B. A. Chalmers, "Boundary, purpose, and values in work-domain models: Models of naval command and control," IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. A, Syst., Humans, vol. 35, no. 5, pp. 603-606, Sep. 2005.
12. C. M. Burns, A. M. Bisantz, and E. M. Roth, "Lessons from a comparison of work models: Representational choices and their implications," Hum. Factors, vol. 46, no. 4, pp. 711-727, Dec. 2004.
13. M. P. Linegang and G. Lintern, "Multifunction displays for optimum manning: Towards functional integration and cross-functional awareness," in Proc. 47th Annu. Meeting Human Factors Ergonomics Soc., 2003, pp. 1923-1927.
14. J. Rasmussen, A. M. Pejtersen, and K. Schmidt, "Taxonomy for cognitive work analysis," Risø Nat. Lab., Roskilde, Denmark, Risø Nat. Lab. Rep. Risø-M-2871, 1990.
15. N. Naikar, R. Hopcroft, and A. Moylan, "Work domain analysis: Theoretical concepts and methodology," Australian Government, Dept. Defence/Defence Sci. Technol. Organization, Victoria, Australia, Rep. DSTO-TR-1665, 2005.
16. K. J. Vicente, Cognitive Work Analysis: Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy Computer-Based Work. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1999.
17. J. Rasmussen, "The role of hierarchical knowledge representation in decision making and system management," IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern., vol. SMC-15, no. 2, pp. 234-243, 1985.
18. J. Rasmussen, A. M. Pejtersen, and L. P. Goodstein, Cognitive Systems Engineering. New York: Wiley, 1994.
19. C. M. Burns and J. Hajdukiewicz, Ecological Interface Design. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2004.
20. G. A. Jamieson and K. J. Vicente, "Ecological interface design for petrochemical applications: Supporting operator adaptation, continuous learning, and distributed collaborative work," Comput. Chem. Eng. vol. 25, pp. 1055-1074, 2001.
21. G. A. Jamieson, C. A. Miller, W. H. Ho, and K. J. Vicente, "Integrating task- and work-domain based work analyses in ecological interface design: A process control case study," IEEE Trans. Syst., Man, Cybern. A, Syst., Humans, vol. 37, no. 6, pp. 887-905, 2007.
22. N. Dinadis and K. J. Vicente, "Ecological interface design for a power plant feedwater subsystem," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 266-277, Feb. 1996.
23. N. Lau, Ø. Veland, J. Kwok, G. A. Jamieson, R. Welch, C. M. Burns, and A. O. Braseth, "Ecological interface design for the secondary subsystems of a boiling water reactor," IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci., to be published.
24. A. M. Bisantz, E. Roth, B. Brickman, L. L. Gosbee, L. Hettinger, and J. McKinney, "Integrating cognitive analyses in a large-scale system design process," Int. J. Hum.-Comput. Studies, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 177-206, Feb. 2003.
25. N. Naikar and P. M. Sanderson, "Evaluating design proposals for complex systems with work domain analysis," Hum. Factors, vol. 43, no. 4, pp. 529-542, 2001.
26. N. Naikar, B. Pearce, D. Drumm, and P. M. Sanderson, "Designing teams for first-of-a-kind, complex systems using the initial phases of cognitive work analysis: Case study," Hum. Factors, vol. 45, no. 2, pp. 202-217, 2003.
27. J. J. Gibson, The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1979 and 1986.
28. G. L. Torenvliet, "We can't afford it: The devaluation of a usability term," Interactions, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 12-17, Jul./Aug. 2003.
29. E. Westermeijer, W. M. Post, W. Keijer, and M. P. W. Gillis, "Teleknowledge, knowledge-at-a-distance," in Proc. 13th Int. Ship Control Syst. Symp., Orlando, FL, 2003.
30. J. K. Pollard, E. D. Sussman, and M. Stearns, "Shipboard crew fatigue, safety, and reduced manning," U.S. Dept. Transp., Maritime Admin., Washington, DC, Rep. DOT-MA-RD-840-90014, 1990.
31. G. L. Torenvliet, G. A. Jamieson, and L. Cournoyer, "Functional modelling, scenario development, and options analysis to support optimized crewing for damage control - Phase 1: Functional modelling," Defence R&D Canada - Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada, Def. Res. Devel. Canada - Toronto CR 2006-090, 2006.
32. K. J. Vicente and F. Tanabe, "Event-independent assessment of operator information requirements: Providing support for unanticipated events," in Proc. Amer. Nuclear Soc. Topical Meeting Nuclear Plan Instrum., Control, Man-Mach. Interface Technol., 1993, pp. 389-393.
33. Maritime Command: Ship's Standing Orders (version AL6), Can. Dept. Nat. Defense, Ottawa, ON, Canada. undated.
34. L. Bucciarelli, "An ethnographic perspective on engineering design," Des. Stud., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 159-168, Jul. 1988.
35. R. Chow and K. J. Vicente, "A field study of collaborative work in network management: Implications for interface design," in Proc. 45th Annu. Meeting Hum. Factors Ergonomics Soc., 2001, pp. 356-360.
36. Canadian Navy Damage Control Information Book for Halifax-Class Ships (Manual No. C-23-HFX-000/MS-002), Can. Dept. Nat. Defense, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2003.
37. Naval Engineering Manual, Can. Dept. Nat. Defense, Ottawa, ON, Canada, 2003. (Manual No. C-03-005-033/AA-000).
38. C. M. Burns and K. J. Vicente, "A participant-observer study of ergonomics in engineering design: How constraints drive design process," Appl. Ergon., vol. 31, no. 1, pp. 73-82, Jan. 2000.
39. P. J. Benda and P. M. Sanderson, "Towards a dynamic model of adaptation to technological change," in Proc. Australasian Conf. Comput. Human Interaction, 1998, pp. 244-251.