Understanding human performance in sociotechnical systems – Steps towards a generic framework

Safety Science

Volumn 107, Issue , 2018, Pages 202-215

  Kyriakidis, Miltos ^a   Kant, Vivek ^a,b   Amir, Sulfikar ^a,b   Dang, Vinh N ^a,c  

^a FUTURE CITIES LABORATORY   (Singapore)

^b NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

^c PAUL SCHERRER INSTITUTE   (Switzerland)

Author keywords

Cognitive and behavioural sciences; Cross sectoral performance shaping factors taxonomy; Human factors human performance; Railway performance shaping factors taxonomy; Sociotechnical systems

Indexed keywords

COGNITIVE SYSTEMS; RAILROAD ACCIDENTS; RAILROAD PLANT AND STRUCTURES; RAILROADS; TAXONOMIES;

BEHAVIOURAL SCIENCE; COMPLEX SOCIOTECHNICAL SYSTEMS; FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS; HUMAN PERFORMANCE; PERFORMANCE SHAPING FACTORS; SAFETY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS; SOCIOTECHNICAL SYSTEMS; WORKING ENVIRONMENT;

BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH;

ACCIDENT; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; BEHAVIORAL SCIENCE; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; ENVIRONMENT; HUMAN; KNOWLEDGE; OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY; OPERATOR; PERFORMANCE; PERFORMANCE SHAPING FACTOR; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGY; PUBLIC SECTOR; RAILWAY; RISK FACTOR; SOCIOTECHNICAL SYSTEM; TAXONOMY; TECHNOLOGY;

EID: 85025169290     PISSN: 09257535     EISSN: 18791042     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2017.07.008     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Amir, S., Juraku, K., Undermining disaster: engineering and epistemological bias in the Fukushima nuclear crisis. Eng. Stud. 6 (2014), 210–226.
2. Bedny, G.Z., Seglin, M.H., Meister, D., Activity theory: history, research and application. Theor. Issues Ergonom. Sci. 1 (2000), 168–206.
3. Bell, J., Holroyd, J., 2009. Review of Human Reliability Assessment Methods. Norwich. < http://www.hse.gov.uk/research/rrpdf/rr679.pdf>.
4. Boring, R.L., Griffith, C.D., Joe, J.C., 2007. The measure of human error: direct and indirect performance shaping factors. In: Joint 8th IEEE Conference on Human Factors and Power Plants/13th Conference on Human Performance, Root Cause and Trending (IEEE HFPP & HPRCT).
5. Carayon, P., Human factors of complex sociotechnical systems. Appl. Ergonom. 37 (2006), 525–535.
6. Costall, A., Socializing affordances. Theory Psychol. 5 (1995), 467–481.
7. De Ambroggi, M., Trucco, P., Modelling and assessment of dependent performance shaping factors through Analytic Network Process. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 96 (2011), 849–860.
8. Dekker, S., The Field Guide to Human Error Investigations. 2002, Ashgate, Aldershot, Hants, England; Burlington, VT.
9. Dekker, S., Drift into Failure: From Hunting Broken Components to Understanding Complex Systems. 2011, Ashgate Publishing Co, Farnham.
10. Dekker, S., Hollnagel, E., Woods, D., Cook, R., Resilience Engineering: New Directions for Measuring and Maintaining Safety in Complex Systems. 2008, Lund University School of Aviation, Lund, Sweden Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238687807_Resilience_Engineering_New_directions_for_measuring_and_maintaining_safety_in_complex_systems.
11. Dix, A., 2007. Designing for appropriation. In: Proceedings of the 21st British HCI Group Annual Conference on People and Computers: HCIEllipsisbut not as we know it – Volume 2. University of Lancaster, United Kingdom.
12. Dourish, P., Where the Action is: The Foundations of Embodied Interaction. 2001, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
13. Dourish, P., Epilogue: where the action was, wasn't, should have been, and might yet be. ACM Trans. Comput. Human Interac. (TOCHI) 20 (2013), 1–4.
14. Eglash, R., Appropriating Technology: Vernacular Science and Social Power. 2004, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN.
15. Engestrom, Y., 2000. Activity Theory as a Framework for Analyzing and Redesigning Work. Ergonomics 43.
16. FERC, 2009 Report on Enforcement. 2009, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. Available from: https://www.ferc.gov/legal/staff-reports/12-17-09-enforcement.pdf.
17. Flach, J.M., Complexity: learning to muddle through. Cognit. Techonol. Work 14 (2012), 187–197.
18. Flach, J.M., Supporting productive thinking: The semiotic context for Cognitive Systems Engineering (CSE). Appl. Ergonom. 59 (2017), 612–624.
19. Flach, J.M., Dominguez, C.O., Use-centered design: integrating the user, instrument, and goal. Ergonom. Des. Quart. Human Fact. Appl. 3 (1995), 19–24.
20. Flach, J.M., Tanabe, F., Monta, K., Vicente, K.J., Rasmussen, J., 1998. An Ecological Approach to Interface Design. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 42, 295-299.
21. Forester, J., Kolaczkowski, A., Lois, E., Kelly, D., 2006. Evaluation of human reliability analysis methods against good practices. United States Nuclear Regualtory Commission. < https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0632/ML063200058.pdf>.
22. Franssen, M., Modelling systems in technology as instrumental systems. Magnani, L., (eds.) Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics, Model-Based Reasoning in Science and Technology, 2014, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany, 543–562.
23. Franssen, M., Design for values and operator roles in sociotechnical systemsociotechnical systems. van den Hoven, J., Vermaas, E.P., van de Poel, I., (eds.) Handbook of Ethics, Values, and Technological Design: Sources, Theory, Values and Application Domains, 2015, Springer, Netherlands, Dordrecht, Netherlands, 117–149.
24. FRCC, FRCC System Disturbance and Underfrequency Load Shedding Event Report. 2008, Florida Reliability Coordinating Council, Tampa, Florida Available from: http://legacyexternalwebsitefiles.balch.com/upload/FRCC_System_Dist_Repor_2_26_2008.pdf.
25. FRS, Future Resilient Systems Booklet. 2015, Singapore-ETH Centre, Singapore < https://www.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/special-interest/dual/frs-dam/documents/FRS-Booklet.pdf>.
26. Gertman, D., Blackman, H., Marble, J., Byers, J., Smith, C., The SPAR-H Human Reliability Analysis Method. 2004, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC < https://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/contract/cr6883/cr6883.pdf>.
27. Gibson, J.J., The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. 1979, Psychology Press Classic Editions, Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
28. Gibson, J.J., 1982. Reasons for realism: Selected essays of James J. Gibson, Reed, E., Jones, R. (Ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
29. Goldenfeld, N., Kadanoff, L.P., Simple lessons from complexity. Science 284 (1999), 87–89.
30. Groth, K.M., A Data-Informed Model of Performance Shaping Factors for Use in Human Reliability Analysis. 2009, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Maryland, Maryland.
31. Haavik, T.K., On components and relations in sociotechnical systems. J. Contingencies Crisis Manage. 19 (2011), 99–109.
32. Hettinger, L.J., Robertson, M.M., Carayon, P., Dainoff, M.J., Kirlik, A., Kleiner, B.M., Waterson, P., 2013. Future Directions for Sociotechnical Systems and Safety: Outcomes from the 2012 Liberty Mutual Hopkinton Conference. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 57, pp. 1085–1087.
33. Hollnagel, E., Cognitive Reliability and Error Analysis Method. 1998, Elsevier.
34. Hollnagel, E., Coping with complexity: past, present and future. Cogn. Technol. Work 14 (2011), 199–205.
35. Hollnagel, E., Human factors/ergonomics as a systems discipline? “The human use of human beings” revisited. Appl. Ergonom. 45 (2014), 40–44.
36. Hutchins, E., Cognition in the Wild. 1995, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
37. Kim, J.W., Jung, W., A taxonomy of performance influencing factors for human reliability analysis of emergency tasks. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 16 (2003), 479–495.
38. Kirwan, B., A Guide to Practical Human Reliability Assessment. 1994, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA.
39. Kolbeinsson, A., Lindblom, J., Mind the body: how embodied cognition matters in manufacturing. Proc. Manuf. 3 (2015), 5184–5191.
40. Kumamoto, H., Henley, E.J., Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Management for Engineers and Scientists. secon ed., 1996, IEEE Press, New York.
41. Kyriakidis, M., Human reliability analysis. Kröger, W., Zio, E., (eds.) Vulnerable Systems, 2011, Springer, London, London, UK.
42. Kyriakidis, M., Majumdar, A., Grote, G., Ochieng, W.Y., Development and assessment of performance shaping factors taxonomy for railway operations. Transport. Res. Rec. J. Transport. Res. Board 2289 (2012), 145–153.
43. Kyriakidis, M., Majumdar, A., Ochieng, W.Y., Data based framework to identify the most significant performance shaping factors in railway operations. Saf. Sci. 78 (2015), 60–76.
44. Lave, J., Wenger, E., Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. 1991, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
45. Leveson, N., SafeWare: System Safety and Computers. 1995, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
46. Leveson, N., A new accident model for engineering safer systems. Saf. Sci. 42 (2004), 237–270.
47. Leveson, N., Engineering a Safer World Systems Thinking Applied to Safety. 2012, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
48. Leveson, N.G., Applying systems thinking to analyze and learn from events. Saf. Sci. 49 (2011), 55–64.
49. Lois, E., Dang, V.N., Forester, J., Broberg, H., Massaiu, S., Hildebrandt, M., Braarud, P.Ø., Gareth, P., Julius, J., Boring, R., Männistö, I., Bye, A., International HRA Empirical Study - Phase 1 Report Description of Overall Approach and Pilot Phase Results from Comparing HRA Methods to Simulator Performance Data. 2009, U.S, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/agreement/ia0216/v1/.
50. Marras, W.S., Hancock, P.A., Putting mind and body back together: a human-systems approach to the integration of the physical and cognitive dimensions of task design and operations. Appl. Ergonom. 45 (2014), 55–60.
51. Marsh, K.L., Johnston, L., Richardson, M.J., Schmidt, R.C., Toward a radically embodied, embedded social psychology. Euro. J. Soc. Psychol. 39 (2009), 1217–1225.
52. McInerney, P.A., 2005a. Special Commission of Inquiry into the Waterfall Rail Accident Volume 1. State of New South Wales. < http://www.transportregulator.nsw.gov.au/publications/waterfall_reports/waterfall_final_report_vol1.pdf>.
53. McInerney, P.A., 2005b. Special Commission of Inquiry into the Waterfall Rail Accident Volume 2. State of New South Wales. < http://www.transportregulator.nsw.gov.au/publications/waterfall_reports/waterfall_final_report_vol2.pdf>.
54. NASA, Report of the Presidential Commission on the Space Shuttle Challenger Accident. 1986, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC Available from: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-CRPT-99hrpt1016/pdf/GPO-CRPT-99hrpt1016.pdf.
55. NASA, Report of Columbia Accident Investigation Board, vol. I, 2003, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Washington, DC Available from: https://www.nasa.gov/columbia/home/CAIB_Vol1.html.
56. Nemeth, C.P., Herrera, I., Building change: Resilience Engineering after ten years. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 141 (2015), 1–4.
57. Norros, L., Acting Under Uncertainty: The Core-Task Analysis in Ecological Study of Work. 2004, VTT Publications, Espoo, Finland http://www.vtt.fi/inf/pdf/publications/2004/P546.pdf.
58. NTSB, Loss of Thrust in Both Engines After Encountering a Flock of Birds and Subsequent Ditching on the Hudson River: us Airways Flight 1549. 2010, National Transportation Safety Board, Washington, DC Available from: http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR1003.pdf.
59. NTSB, Railroad Accident Brief Collision of Two Union Pacific Railroad Freight Trains. 2015, National Transportation Safety Board, Washington, DC Available from: http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Pages/RAB1508.aspx.
60. Onofrio, R., Trucco, P., Torchio, A., Towards a Taxonomy of Influencing Factors for Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) Applications in Surgery. Proc. Manuf. 3 (2015), 144–151.
61. Paté-Cornell, E., Learning from the piper Alpha accident: a postmortem analysis of technical and organizational factors. Risk Anal. 13:2 (1993), 215–232.
62. Paté-Cornell, E., Fishbeck, P., PRA as management tool: organizational factors and risk-based priorities for the maintenance of the tiles of the space shuttle orbiter. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 40 (1993), 239–257.
63. Prigogine, I., The End of Certainty: Time, Chaos, and the New Laws of Nature. 1997, Free Press, New York.
64. RAIB, 2007. Signal T172 passed at danger at Purley station, Surrey, 18 August 2006. Rail Accident Investigation Branch. < https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/411941/070808_R272007_Purley.pdf>.
65. Rasmussen, J., Human errors. A taxonomy for describing human malfunction in industrial installations. J. Occupat. Accidents 4 (1982), 311–333.
66. Rasmussen, J., 1983. Skills, rules, and knowledge; signals, signs, and symbols, and other distinctions in human performance models. In: IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics SMC-13, 257–266.
67. Rasmussen, J., Information Processing and Human-Machine Interaction: An Approach to Cognitive Engineering. 1986, North-Holland, New York.
68. Rasmussen, J., Risk management in a dynamic society: a modelling problem. Saf. Sci. 27 (1997), 183–213.
69. Rasmussen, J., Pejtersen, A.M., Goodstein, L.P., Cognitive Systems Engineering. 1994, John Wiley, New York.
70. Rasmussen, J., Svedung, I., Proactive Risk Management in a Dynamic Society. 2000, Swedish Rescue Services Agency, Karlstad, Sweden Available from: https://rib.msb.se/filer/pdf/16252.pdf.
71. Richardson, M.J., Shockley, K., Fajen, B.R., Riley, M.A., Turvey, M.T., Ecological psychology: Six principles for an embodied–embedded approach to behavior. Galvo, P., Gomila, T., (eds.) Elsevier Hand Book of New Directions in Cognitive Science, 2008, Elsevier, 161–187.
72. Sasou, K., Reason, J., Team errors: definition and taxonomy. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 65 (1999), 1–9.
73. Simon, H.A., The Sciences of the Artificial. third ed., 1996, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
74. Skogdalen, J.E., Vinnem, J.E., Quantitative risk analysis offshore—Human and organizational factors. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Saf. 96 (2011), 468–479.
75. Sträter, O., Evaluation of Human Reliability on the Basis of Operational Experience, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences. 2000, Munich Technical University, Munich, Germany.
76. Suchman, L.A., Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions. 2007, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
77. Swain, A.D., Guttmann, H.E., 1983. Handbook of Human Reliability Analysis with Emphasis on Nuclear Power Plant Applications. < https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML0712/ML071210299.pdf>.
78. TSBC, 2016. Risk of collision. Transportation Safety Board of Canada. < http://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-reports/rail/2015/r15t0245/r15t0245.asp>.
79. Vermaas, P., Kroes, P., van de Poel, I., Franssen, M., Houkes, W., A Philosophy of Technology: From Technical Artefacts to Sociotechnical Systems. 2011, Morgan & Claypool Publishers, San Rafael, CA.
80. Vicente, K.J., Cognitive Work Analysis Toward Safe, Productive, and Healthy Computer-Based Work. 1999, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
81. Vygotskii, L.S., Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. 1978, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
82. Waterson, P., Robertson, M.M., Cooke, N.J., Militello, L., Roth, E., Stanton, N.A., Defining the methodological challenges and opportunities for an effective science of sociotechnical systems and safety. Ergonomics 58 (2015), 565–599.
83. Williams, J.C., 1988. A Data-Based Method for Assessing and Reducing Human Error to Improve Operational Procedures. 4th IEEE Conference: Human Factors and Power Plants. Monterey, CA, USA.