论文信息 - On taking human performance seriously in risk analysis: Comments on dougherty

On taking human performance seriously in risk analysis: Comments on dougherty

Abstract As Dougherty points out, the task of understanding the human contribution to safety and risk has been delayed too long. To begin to take human performance questions seriously in risk analysis requires sophisticated causal modeling of human behaviour in the context of different tasks and performance aids, empirical research to understand the sources of errors, especially cognitive error types, and empirical research to understand how changes in the person-machine system impact on error types.

David Woods | D. Woods

[1] James B. Moen,et al. Garden Path Errors in Diagnostic Reasoning , 1988 .

[2] D. D. Woods,et al. The Cognitive Environment Simulation as a tool for modeling human performance and reliability , 1990 .

[3] Emilie M. Roth,et al. Modeling human intention formation for human reliability assessment , 1988 .

[4] Lucy Suchman. Plans and situated actions: the problem of human-machine communication , 1987 .

[5] E. M. Dougherty,et al. Human reliability analysis - where shouldst thou turn? , 1990 .

[6] Kevin B. Bennett,et al. Human Interaction with an "Intelligent" Machine , 1987, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[7] Jens Rasmussen,et al. Information Processing and Human-Machine Interaction: An Approach to Cognitive Engineering , 1986 .

[8] David D. Woods,et al. Modeling and predicting human error , 1989 .

[9] David Woods,et al. Risk and human performance: Measuring the potential for disaster , 1990 .

[10] Earl L. Wiener,et al. Human factors of advanced technology (glass cockpit) transport aircraft , 1989 .

[11] D. Norman,et al. New technology and human error , 1989 .

[12] David Woods,et al. Human factors challenges in process control: The case of nuclear power plants. , 1987 .

[13] D. D. Woods,et al. Fixation Errors: Failures to Revise Situation Assessment in Dynamic and Risky Systems , 1990 .