An optimal range of information quantity on computer-based procedure interface design in the advanced main control room

Journal of Nuclear Science and Technology

Volumn 52, Issue 5, 2015, Pages 687-694

  Hsieh, Min Chih ^a   Chiu, Ming Chuan ^a   Hwang, Sheue Ling ^a  

^a NATIONAL TSING HUA UNIVERSITY   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

computer based procedures (CBPs); human computer interface; interface design; nuclear power plant (NPP); the quantification of information

Indexed keywords

NUCLEAR ENERGY; NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS;

ADVANCED MAIN CONTROL ROOMS; COMPUTER-BASED PROCEDURE; DEPENDENT VARIABLES; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERFACES; INFORMATION QUANTITY; INTERFACE DESIGNS; OPERATOR PERFORMANCE; THE QUANTIFICATION OF INFORMATION;

NUCLEAR FUELS;

EID: 84927786668     PISSN: 00223131     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00223131.2014.977832     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. O'Hara J, Brown WS, Lewis PM, Persensky JJ. Human-system interface design review guidelines. Washington (DC): U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; 2002. (Tech. Rep. NUREG-0700 Rev. 2).
2. Hong JH, Lee MS, Hwang DH. Computerized procedure system for the APR 1400 simulator. Nucl Eng Des. 2009;239(12):3092-3104.
3. Yang CW, Yang LC, Cheng TC, Jou YT, Chiou SW. Assessing mental workload and situation awareness in the evaluation of computerized procedures in the main control room. Nucl Eng Des. 2012;250:713-719.
4. O'Hara J, Higgins J, Stubler W, Kramer J. (2000). Computer-based procedure systems: Technical basis and human factors review guidance. Washington (DC): U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; 2000. (NUREG/CR-6634).
5. Roth E, O'Hara J. Integrating digital and conventional human system interface technology: Lessons learned from a control room modernization program. Washington (DC): U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission; 2002. (NUREG/CR-6749).
6. O'Hara J, Pirus D, Nilsen S, Biso R, Hulsund JE, Zhang W. Computerization of procedures: Lessons learned and future perspectives (HWR-355). Halden, Norway: Institutt for Energiteknikk, OECD Halden Reactor Project; 2003.
7. Fink RT, Killian CD, Hanes LF, Naser JA. Guidelines for the design and implementation of computerized procedures. Nuclear News. 2009;52(3): 85-90.
8. Han SH, Yang H, Im DG. Designing a human-computer interface for a process control room: A case study of a steel manufacturing company. Int J Ind Ergon. 2007;37(5):383-393.
9. Drivalou S, Marmaras N. Supporting skill-, rule-, and knowledge-based behavior through an ecological interface: An industry-scale application. Int J Ind Ergon. 2009;39(6):947-965.
10. Hwang SL, Liang SF, Yeh Liu TY, Yang YJ, Chen PY, Chuang CF. Evaluation of human factors in interface design in main control room. Nucl Eng Des. 2009;239(12):3069-3075.
11. Lin CH,Hwang SL,Wang EMY. Design for usability on supply chain management system implementation. Hum Factors Ergon Manuf. 2009;19(5):378-403.
12. Ponsa P, Vilanova R, Amante B. Human intervention and interface design in automation system. Int J Comput Commun. 2011;6(1):166-174.
13. Ujita H. Human error classification and analysis in nuclear power plant. J Nucl Sci Technol. 1985;22(6):496-498.
14. Kitamura M, Fujita Y, Yoshikawa H. Review of international standards related to the design for control rooms on nuclear power plant. J Nucl Sci Technol. 2005;42(4):406-417.
15. Hsieh MC, Chiu MC, Hwang SL. An interface redesign for the feed-water system of the advanced boiling water reactor in a nuclear power plant in Taiwan. J Nucl Sci Technol. 2014;51(5):720-729.
16. Wourms D, Rankin W. Computer-based procedures. OH: Armstrong Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory, Crew System Ergonomic Information Analysis Center (CSERIAC); 1994. (CSERIAC-RA-94-002).
17. Jung Y, Seong PH, Kim MC. A model for computerized procedures based on flowcharts and success logic trees. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 2004;26(3):351-362.
18. Xu S, Song F, Li Z, Zhao Q, Luo W, He X, Salvendy G. An ergonomics study of computerized emergency operating procedures: Presentation style, task complexity, and training level. Reliab Eng Syst Saf. 2008;93(10):1500-1511.
19. Carvalho PVR, dos Santos IL, Gomes JO, Borges MRS, Guerlain S. Human factors approach for evaluation and redesign of human-system interfaces of a nuclear power plant simulator. Display. 2008;29(3):273-284.
20. SuKW,ChenCJ, Shue LY. Implication of cognitive style in designing computer-based procedure interface. Hum Factors Ergon Manuf. 2013;23(3):230-242.
21. Kang HG, Seong PH. An information theory-based approach for quantitative evaluation of user interface complexity. IEEE Trans Nucl Sci. 1998;45(6):3165-3174.
22. Kang HG, Seong PH. Information theoretic approach to man-machine interface complexity evaluation. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern A Syst Hum. 2001;31(3):163-171.
23. Wickens CD, Hollands JG. Engineering psychology and human performance. NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.; 2002.
24. Shneiderman B, Plaisant C.Designing the user interface: Strategies for effective human-computer interaction. NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.; 2004.
25. Hsieh MC, Hwang SL. The effect of information quantity on CBP interface in the advanced nuclear power plant. In: Kurosu M, editor. Users and Contexts of Use. Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction; 2013 Jul 21-26; Las Vegas (NV): Mirage Hotel; 2013.
26. Shannon CE, Weaver W. The mathematical theory of communications. ACM SIGMOBILE Mob Com Commun Rev. 2001;5(1):3-55.
27. Hart SG, Staveland LE. Development of NASA-TLX (task load index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Adv Psychol. 1988;52:139-183.
28. Kaber DB, Onal E, EndsleyMR. Design of automation for telerobots and the effect on performance, operator situation awareness, and subject workload. Hum Factors Ergon Manuf. 2000;10(4):409-430.