Issues in benchmarking human reliability analysis methods: A literature review

Reliability Engineering and System Safety

Volumn 95, Issue 6, 2010, Pages 591-605

  Boring, Ronald L ^a   Hendrickson, Stacey M L ^a   Forester, John A ^a   Tran, Tuan Q ^b   Lois, Erasmia ^c  

^a SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES   (United States)

^b IDAHO NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

^c U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION   (United States)

Author keywords

Benchmark; Comparison; Human reliability analysis

Indexed keywords

BENCHMARK COMPARISON; EMPIRICAL COMPARISON; HUMAN PERFORMANCE; HUMAN RELIABILITY ANALYSIS; LESSONS LEARNED; LITERATURE REVIEWS; OPERATOR PERFORMANCE; PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT;

BENCHMARKING; QUALITY ASSURANCE; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK MANAGEMENT;

RELIABILITY ANALYSIS;

EID: 77949658723     PISSN: 09518320     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2010.02.002     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Lois E, Dang VN, Forester F, Broberg H, Massaiu S, Hildebrandt M, et al. International HRA empirical study-Pilot phase report. Description of overall approach and first pilot results from comparing HRA methods to simulator data, HWR-844. OECD Halden Reactor Project, Halden, 2008.
2. Boring R. Human and computerized essay assessment: a comparative analysis of holistic, analytic, and latent semantic methods. Unpublished master's thesis, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, 2002.
3. Cohen J. Statistical power analyses for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed (1988), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale
4. Murphy K., and Myors B. Statistical power analysis. A simple and general model for traditional and modern hypothesis tests. 2nd ed (2004), Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah
5. Jonassen D., Beissner K., and Yacci M. Structural knowledge: techniques for representing, conveying, and acquiring structural knowledge (1993), Erlbaum, Hillsdale
6. Faulkner L. Reducing variability: research into structured approaches to usability testing and evaluation. In: Proceedings of the annual conference of the Usability Professionals Association, Florida, 2002.
7. Kessner M. On the reliability of usability testing. Unpublished master's thesis, Carleton University, Ottawa, 2000.
8. Chaparro B., and Gibson A. Planning your next vacation: Orbitz, Expedia, or Travelocity?. Usability News 4.1 (2002) 1-5
9. Meyer J., Bitan Y., and Shinar D. Displaying a boundary in graphic and symbolic "wait" displays: duration estimates and users' preferences. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 7 (1995) 273-290
10. Meyer J., Shinar D., Bitan Y., and Leiser D. Duration estimates and users' preferences in human-computer interaction. Ergonomics 39 (1996) 46-60
11. Nielsen J. Usability engineering (1993), AP Professional, Boston
12. Ryu Y., and Smith-Jackson T. Reliability and validity of the Mobile Phone Usability Questionnaire (MPUQ). Journal of Usability Studies 2 (2006) 39-53
13. Best B., Lebiere C., Schunk D., Johnson I., and Archer R. Validating a cognitive model of approach based on the ACT-R architecture (2005), Micro Analysis & Design, Inc., Boulder
14. Turing A. Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind 59 (1950) 433-460
15. Leiden K., and Best B. A cross-model comparison of human performance modeling tools applied to aviation safety (2005), Micro Analysis & Design, Inc., Boulder
16. Lauridsen K, Kozine I, Markert F, Amendola A, Christou M, Fiori M. Assessment of uncertainties in risk analysis of chemical establishments: the ASSURANCE project. Final Report, Risø-R-1344(EN), Risø National Laboratory, Roskilde, 2002.
17. Contini S, Amendola A, Ziomas I. Benchmark exercise on major hazard analysis, vol. 1. Description of the project, discussion of the results and conclusions, Final Report, EUR 13386. Ispra: CEC-JRC; 1991.
18. Amendola A., Contini S., and Ziomas I. Uncertainties in chemical risk assessment: results of a European benchmark exercise. Journal of Hazardous Materials 29 (1992) 347-363
19. Fabbri L, Jirsa P, Contini S. Benchmark exercise in quantitative area risk assessment in central and eastern European countries (BEQUAR), Final Report, EUR 22619. Ispra: CEC-JRC; 2007.
20. Swain A. Comparative evaluation of methods for human reliability analysis, GRS-71 (1989), Gesellschaft für Reaktorsicherheit, Cologne
21. Kirwan B. Human error identification in human reliability assessment. Part 1: overview of approaches. Applied Ergonomics 23 (1992) 299-318
22. Kirwan B. Human error identification in human reliability assessment. Part 2: detailed comparison of techniques. Applied Ergonomics 23 (1992) 371-381
23. Chander F.T., Chang Y.H., Mosleh A., Marble J.L., Boring R.L., and Gertman D.I. Human reliability analysis methods: selection guidance for NASA (2006), NASA Office of Safety and Mission Assurance, Washington, DC
24. Forester J, Kolaczkowski A, Lois E, Kelly D. Evaluation of human reliability analysis methods against good practices. Final report, NUREG-1842. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 2006.
25. Kolaczkowski A, Forester J, Lois E, Cooper S. Good practices for implementing human reliability analysis: Final report, NUREG-1792. US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 2005.
26. Adhikari S, Bayley C, Bedford T, Busby J, Cliffe A, Devgun G, et al. Human reliability analysis: a review and critique. Final report of the EPSRC funded project rethinking human reliability analysis methodologies. Manchester Business School, Manchester, UK, 2008.
27. Bell J., and Holyroyd J. Review of human reliability assessment methods, RR679 (2009), Health and Safety Executive, Buxton, UK
28. Poucet A. Survey of methods used to assess human reliability in the human factors reliability benchmark exercise. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 22 (1988) 257-268
29. Poucet A. The European benchmark exercise on human reliability analysis. In: Proceedings of the American Nuclear Society international topical meeting on probability, reliability, and safety assessment, Pittsburgh, 1989. p. 103-10.
30. Poucet A. Human factors reliability benchmark exercise, Final Report, EUR 12222 (1989), CEC-JRC, Ispra
31. Zimolong B. Empirical evaluation of THERP, SLIM, and ranking to estimate HEPs. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 35 (1992) 1-11
32. Kirwan B. The validation of three human reliability quantification techniques-THERP, HEART, and JHEDI: Part I-Technique descriptions and validation issues. Applied Ergonomics 27 (1996) 359-373
33. Kirwan B. The validation of three human reliability quantification techniques-THERP, HEART, and JHEDI: Part II-Results of validation exercise. Applied Ergonomics 28 (1997) 17-25
34. Kirwan B. The validation of three human reliability quantification techniques-THERP, HEART, and JHEDI: Part III-Practical aspects of the usage of the techniques. Applied Ergonomics 28 (1997) 27-39
35. Kirwan B, Basra G, Taylor-Adams SE. CORE-DATA: a computerised human error database for human reliability support. In: Proceedings of the 1997 IEEE sixth conference on human factors and power plants. New York: Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Inc.; 1997. p. 9.7-9.12.
36. Maguire R. Validating a process for understanding human error probabilities in complex human computer interfaces. Proceedings of the second workshop on complexity in design (2005), Glasgow University Press, Glasgow 81-89