A computerized tool to evaluate the cognitive compatibility of the emergency operational procedures task flow

Progress in Nuclear Energy

Volumn 51, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 409-419

  Carvalho, Paulo Victor R ^a   de Oliveira, Mauro Vitor ^a   Luquetti dos Santos, Isaac J ^a  

^a National Nuclear Energy Commission   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Cognitive engineering; Nuclear power plant operation; Procedure design; Task flow

Indexed keywords

ACCIDENTS; COGNITIVE SYSTEMS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; LOSS OF COOLANT ACCIDENTS; NUCLEAR ENERGY; NUCLEAR INDUSTRY; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS; NUCLEAR REACTOR ACCIDENTS; POWER PLANTS; SOIL STRUCTURE INTERACTIONS;

COGNITIVE ARCHITECTURES; COGNITIVE ENGINEERING; COMPUTERIZED TOOLS; DECISION SUPPORT TOOLS; HUMAN OPERATORS; LOW COSTS; NUCLEAR POWER PLANT OPERATION; NUCLEAR POWER PRODUCTIONS; OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES; PLANT DYNAMICS; PROCEDURE DESIGN; REGULATORY BODIES; SAFETY-CRITICAL; TASK FLOW; TIME INTERVALS; TIMING ASSUMPTIONS;

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS;

EID: 60449087245     PISSN: 01491970     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.pnucene.2008.09.007     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. AICE - Center for Chemical Process Safety. Guidelines for Preventing Human Error in Process Safety (2004), American Institute of Chemical Engineers
2. Anderson J.R. Rules of Mind (1993), Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ
3. Anderson J.R., Bothell D., Byrne M.D., Douglas S., Lebiere C., and Qin Y. An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological Review 111 4 (2004) 1036-1060
4. ANS 58.8. Time Response Design Criteria for Safety-Related Operator Actions (1994), American Nuclear Society, USA
5. Boehm-Davis, D.A., Holt, R.W., Diez, M., Hansberger, J.T., 2002. Developing and validating cockpit interventions based on cognitive modeling. In: Proceedings of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, August 2002, Fairfax, VA.
6. Brumby, D.P., Saluvicci, D.D., 2006. Towards a constraint analysis of human multitasking. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Cognitive Modeling, Trieste, Italy, pp. 353-354.
7. Card S., Moran T., and Newell A. The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction (1983), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, New Jersey
8. Carvalho P.V.R., Vidal M.C.R., and Carvalho E.F. Nuclear power plant communications in normative and actual practice: a field study of control room operators' communications. Human Factors in Ergonomics and Manufacturing 17 1 (2007) 43-78
9. Carvalho P.V.R., Santos I.L., and Vidal M.C.R. Safety implications of cultural and cognitive issues in nuclear power plant operation. Applied Ergonomics 37 2 (2006) 211-223
10. Carvalho P.V.R., Santos I.L., and Vidal M.C.R. Nuclear power plant shift supervisor's decision making during micro incidents. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 35 7 (2005) 619-644
11. CE system 80 +, 1989. Function and task analysis - final report. Human Factors Services, Combustion Engineering, January 1989.
12. Cowan N. The magical number 4 in short-term memory: a reconsideration of mental shortage capacity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (2001) 87-185
13. DeCortis F., DeKeyser V., Cacciabue P.C., and Volta G. The temporal dimension of man-machine interaction. In: Weir G.R.S., and Alty J.L. (Eds). Human-Computer Interaction and Complex Systems (1991), Academic, London 51-72
14. Degani A., and Wiener E. Procedures in complex systems: the airline cockpit. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans 27 3 (1997) 302-312
15. DeKeyser V. Time in ergonomics research. Ergonomics 38 8 (1995) 1639-1660
16. De Terssac G., and Leplat J. La fiabilité et l'ergonomie: spécificité et complémentarité. Revue de Psychologie Appliquée 40 3 (1990) 377-386
17. Dien Y., and Montmayeul R. Contribution of the Ergonomic Analysis to the Improvement of the Design of Operating Procedures in Nuclear Power Plants. 93NB00043 (1992), Electricite de France
18. Gauthereau V., and Hollnagel E. Planning, control, and adaptation: a case study. European Management Journal 23 1 (2005) 118-131
19. 'Good' organizational reasons for 'bad' clinic records. In: Garfinkel H. (Ed). Studies in Ethnomethodology (1967), Prentice-Hall, Englewood-Cliffs, NJ 186-207
20. Ghosh S.T., and Apostolakis G.E. Organizational contributions to nuclear power plant safety. Nuclear Engineering and Technology 37 3 (2005) 207-220
21. Hirshhorn L. Hierarchy versus bureaucracy: the case of a nuclear reactor. In: Roberts K. (Ed). New Challenges to Understand Organizations (1993), Macmillan Publishing Co, New Work, NJ
22. Hollnagel E. Human reliability assessment in context. Nuclear Engineering and Technology 37 2 (2005) 159-166
23. Hollnagel E., and Woods D.D. Joint Cognitive Systems: An Introduction to Cognitive Systems Engineering (2005), Taylor & Francis
24. Hollnagel E. Time and time again. Theoretical Issues on Ergonomics Science 3 2 (2002) 143-158
25. IAEA. Guidelines for Upgrade and Modernization of Nuclear Power Plant Training Simulators, IAEA-TECDOC-1500 (2006), International Atomic Energy Agency, Viena
26. Jung Y., Seong P., and Kim M. A model for computerized procedures based on flowcharts and success logic trees. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 26 (2004) 351-362
27. Juvina, I., Taatgen, N.A., Dickison, D., 2007. Cognitive control as alternation of activation and suppression in the stroop task. In: Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Nashville, TN, USA.
28. Kieras D. A Guide to GOMS Model Usability Evaluation Using NGOMSL and GLEAN 3 (1999), Michigan University, USA
29. KTA 3501. Reactor Protection System and Monitoring Equipment of the Safety System, Standard Group 3500, Safety Standard (1985), TUV, Germany
30. Lapinsky G. Lessons Learned from the Special Inspection Program for Emergency Operation Procedures, NUREG-1358 (1988), US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
31. La Porte T., and Thomas C. Regulatory compliance and the ethos of quality enhancement: surprises in nuclear power plant operations. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 5 (1995) 109-137
32. Newell A., and Simon H.A. Human Problem Solving (1972), Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ
33. O'Hara J.M., et al. Computer-Based Procedure Systems: Technical Basis and Human Factors Review Guidance. NUREG/CR-6634 (2000), US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
34. Park J., and Jung W. A study on the development of a task complexity measure for emergency operating procedures of nuclear power plants. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 92 (2007) 1102-1116
35. Park J., et al. Identifying cognitive complexity factors affecting the complexity of procedural steps in emergency operating procedures of a nuclear power plant. Reliability Engineering & System Safety 89 (2005) 121-136
36. Perrow C. Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies (1984), Basic Books, New York
37. Rasmussen J., and Jensen A. Mental procedures in real-life tasks: a case of electronic trouble shooting. Ergonomics 17 (1974) 293-307
38. Reason J. The Chernobil errors. Bulletin of British Psychological Society 40 (1987) 201-206
39. Roth E., et al. An Empirical Investigation of Operator Performance in Cognitively Demanding Simulated Emergencies. NUREG/CR-6208 (1994), US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
40. Silva, N.G., Alvarenga, M.B., Coelho, M.J., 2003. In: Transactions of the 17th International Conference on Structural Mechanics in Reactor Technology (SMiRT 17). August 17-22, Prague, Czech Republic.
41. Suchman L. Plans and Situated Actions: The Problem of Human-Machine Communication (1987), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA
42. USNRC. Evaluation of Emergency Operating Procedures for Nuclear Power Plants. NUREG/CR-1875 (1981), US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
43. USNRC. Guidelines for the Preparation of the Emergency Operating Procedures. NUREG/CR-0899 (1982), US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
44. USNRC. Checklist for Evaluating Emergency Operating Procedures Used in Nuclear Power Plants. NUREG/CR-2005 (1983), US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
45. Vicente K., Mumaw R., and Roth E. Cognitive Functioning of Control Room Operators - Final Phase. AECB 96-175 (1997), Atomic Energy Canadian Bureau, Ottawa
46. Wright P., and McCarthy J. Analysis of procedure following as concerned work. In: Hollnagel E. (Ed). Handbook of Cognitive Task Design (2003), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, London 679-701