Reclaiming human machine nature

Extending and modifying his domain of life by artifact production is one of the main characteristics of humankind. From the first hominid, who used a wood stick or a stone for extending his upper limbs and augmenting his gesture strength, to current systems engineers who used technologies for augmenting human cognition, perception and action, extending human body capabilities remains a big issue. From more than fifty years cybernetics, computer and cognitive sciences have imposed only one reductionist model of human machine systems: cognitive systems. Inspired by philosophy, behaviorist psychology and the information treatment metaphor, the cognitive system paradigm requires a function view and a functional analysis in human systems design process. According that design approach, human have been reduced to his metaphysical and functional properties in a new dualism. Human body requirements have been left to physical ergonomics or "physiology". With multidisciplinary convergence, the issues of "human-machine" systems and "human artifacts" evolve. The loss of biological and social boundaries between human organisms and interactive and informational physical artifact questions the current engineering methods and ergonomic design of cognitive systems. New developpment of human machine systems for intensive care, human space activities or bio-engineering sytems requires grounding human systems design on a renewed epistemological framework for future human systems model and evidence based "bio-engineering". In that context, reclaiming human factors, augmented human and human machine nature is a necessityComment: Published in HCI International 2014, Heraklion : Greece (2014

Task analysis for error identification: Theory, method and validation

This paper presents the underlying theory of Task Analysis for Error Identification. The aim is to illustrate the development of a method that has been proposed for the evaluation of prototypical designs from the perspective of predicting human error. The paper presents the method applied to representative examples. The methodology is considered in terms of the various validation studies that have been conducted, and is discussed in the light of a specific case study

Implementing resilience engineering for healthcare quality improvement using the CARE model: a feasibility study protocol

BACKGROUND: Resilience engineering (RE) is an emerging perspective on safety in complex adaptive systems that emphasises how outcomes emerge from the complexity of the clinical environment. Complexity creates the need for flexible adaptation to achieve outcomes. RE focuses on understanding the nature of adaptations, learning from success and increasing adaptive capacity. Although the philosophy is clear, progress in applying the ideas to quality improvement has been slow. The aim of this study is to test the feasibility of translating RE concepts into practical methods to improve quality by designing, implementing and evaluating interventions based on RE theory. The CARE model operationalises the key concepts and their relationships to guide the empirical investigation. METHODS: The settings are the Emergency Department and the Older Person's Unit in a large London teaching hospital. Phases 1 and 2 of our work, leading to the development of interventions to improve the quality of care, are described in this paper. Ethical approval has been granted for these phases. Phase 1 will use ethnographic methods, including observation of work practices and interviews with staff, to understand adaptations and outcomes. The findings will be used to collaboratively design, with clinical staff in interactive design workshops, interventions to improve the quality of care. The evaluation phase will be designed and submitted for ethical approval when the outcomes of phases 1 and 2 are known. DISCUSSION: Study outcomes will be knowledge about the feasibility of applying RE to improve quality, the development of RE theory and a validated model of resilience in clinical work which can be used to guide other applications. Tools, methods and practical guidance for practitioners will also be produced, as well as specific knowledge of the potential effectiveness of the implemented interventions in emergency and older people's care. Further studies to test the application of RE at a larger scale will be required, including studies of other healthcare settings, organisational contexts and different interventions

Human factors in general practice: early thoughts on the educational focus for specialty training and beyond

In the third article in the series, we describe the outputs from a series of roundtable discussions by Human Factors experts and General Practice (GP) Educational Supervisors tasked with examining the GP (family medicine) training and work environments through the lens of the systems and designed-centred discipline of Human Factors and Ergonomics (HFE). A prominent issue agreed upon proposes that the GP setting should be viewed as a complex sociotechnical system from a care service and specialty training perspective. Additionally, while the existing GP specialty training curriculum in the United Kingdom (UK) touches on some important HFE concepts, we argue that there are also significant educational gaps that could be addressed (e.g. physical workplace design, work organisation, the design of procedures, decision-making and human reliability) to increase knowledge and skills that are key to understanding workplace complexity and interactions, and supporting everyday efforts to improve the performance and wellbeing of people and organisations. Altogether we propose and illustrate how future HFE content could be enhanced, contexualised and integrated within existing training arrangements, which also serves as a tentative guide in this area for continuing professional development for the wider GP and primary care teams

Toward General Principles for Resilience Engineering

Maintaining the performance of infrastructure‐dependent systems in the face of surprises and unknowable risks is a grand challenge. Addressing this issue requires a better understanding of enabling conditions or principles that promote system resilience in a universal way. In this study, a set of such principles is interpreted as a group of interrelated conditions or organizational qualities that, taken together, engender system resilience. The field of resilience engineering identifies basic system or organizational qualities (e.g., abilities for learning) that are associated with enhanced general resilience and has packaged them into a set of principles that should be fostered. However, supporting conditions that give rise to such first‐order system qualities remain elusive in the field. An integrative understanding of how such conditions co‐occur and fit together to bring about resilience, therefore, has been less clear. This article contributes to addressing this gap by identifying a potentially more comprehensive set of principles for building general resilience in infrastructure‐dependent systems. In approaching this aim, we organize scattered notions from across the literature. To reflect the partly self‐organizing nature of infrastructure‐dependent systems, we compare and synthesize two lines of research on resilience: resilience engineering and social‐ecological system resilience. Although some of the principles discussed within the two fields overlap, there are some nuanced differences. By comparing and synthesizing the knowledge developed in them, we recommend an updated set of resilience‐enhancing principles for infrastructure‐dependent systems. In addition to proposing an expanded list of principles, we illustrate how these principles can co‐occur and their interdependencies.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/156462/2/risa13494_am.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/156462/1/risa13494.pd

Virtuality in human supervisory control: Assessing the effects of psychological and social remoteness

Virtuality would seem to offer certain advantages for human supervisory control. First, it could provide a physical analogue of the 'real world' environment. Second, it does not require control room engineers to be in the same place as each other. In order to investigate these issues, a low-fidelity simulation of an energy distribution network was developed. The main aims of the research were to assess some of the psychological concerns associated with virtual environments. First, it may result in the social isolation of the people, and it may have dramatic effects upon the nature of the work. Second, a direct physical correspondence with the 'real world' may not best support human supervisory control activities. Experimental teams were asked to control an energy distribution network. Measures of team performance, group identity and core job characteristics were taken. In general terms, the results showed that teams working in the same location performed better than team who were remote from one another

Development of a generic activities model of command and control

This paper reports on five different models of command and control. Four different models are reviewed: a process model, a contextual control model, a decision ladder model and a functional model. Further to this, command and control activities are analysed in three distinct domains: armed forces, emergency services and civilian services. From this analysis, taxonomies of command and control activities are developed that give rise to an activities model of command and control. This model will be used to guide further research into technological support of command and control activities

A field study of team working in a new human supervisory control system

This paper presents a case study of an investigation into team behaviour in an energy distribution company. The main aim was to investigate the impact of major changes in the company on system performance, comprising human and technical elements. A socio-technical systems approach was adopted. There were main differences between the teams investigated in the study: the time of year each control room was studied (i.e. summer or winter),the stage of development each team was in (i.e. 10 months), and the team structure (i.e. hierarchical or heterarchical). In all other respects the control rooms were the same: employing the same technology and within the same organization. The main findings were: the teams studied in the winter months were engaged in more `planning’ and `awareness’ type of activities than those studies in the summer months. Newer teams seem to be engaged in more sharing of information than older teams, which maybe indicative of the development process. One of the hierarchical teams was engaged in more `system-driven’ activities than the heterarchical team studied at the same time of year. Finally, in general, the heterarchical team perceived a greater degree of team working culture than its hierarchical counterparts. This applied research project confirms findings from laboratory research and emphasizes the importance of involving ergonomics in the design of team working in human supervisory control

Three-tiered approach for standard information requirements for polymers requiring registration under REACH

Polymers are a very large class of chemicals comprising often complex molecules with multiple functions used in everyday products. The EU Commission is seeking to develop environmental and human health standard information requirements (SIRs) for man-made polymers requiring registration (PRR) under a revised Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) Regulation. Conventional risk assessment approaches currently used for small molecules may not apply to most polymers. Therefore, we propose a conceptual three-tiered regulatory approach for data generation to assess individual and groups of polymers requiring registration (PRR). A key element is the grouping of polymers according to chemistry, physico-chemical properties and hazard similarity. The limited bioavailability of many polymers is a prominent difference to many small molecules and is a key consideration of the proposed approach. Methods assessing potential for systemic bioavailability are integral to Tier 1. Decisions for further studies are based on considerations of properties and effects, combined with systemic bioavailability and use and exposure considerations. For many PRRs, Tier 1 data on hazard, use and exposure will likely be sufficient for achieving the protection goals of REACH. Vertebrate animal studies in Tiers 2 and 3 can be limited to targeted testing. The outlined approach aims to make use of current best scientific evidence and to reduce animal testing whilst providing data for an adequate level of protection