Function Allocation for Humans and Automation in the Context of Team Dynamics

AbstractWithin Human Factors Engineering, a decision-making process called function allocation (FA) is used during the design life cycle of complex systems to distribute the system functions, typically identified through a functional requirements analysis, to all human and automated machine agents (or teammates) involved in controlling the system. Most FA methods make allocation decisions primarily by comparing the capabilities of humans and automation, and then by considering secondary factors such as cost, regulations, and the health and safety of workers. The primary analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of humans and machines, however, is almost always considered in terms of individual human or machine capabilities. Yet, FA is fundamentally about teamwork in that the goal of the FA decision-making process is to determine the optimal allocations of functions among agents. Given this framing of FA, and the increasing use of and sophistication of automation, there are two related social psychological issues that current FA methods need to address more thoroughly. First, many principles for effective human teamwork are not considered as central decision points or in the iterative hypothesis and testing phase in most FA methods, despite the fact that social factors have numerous positive and negative effects on individual and team capabilities. Second, social psychological factors affecting team performance can be difficult to translate to automated agents, and most FA methods currently do not account for this effect. The implications for these issues are discussed

Model of Procedure Usage – Results from a Qualitative Study to Inform Design of Computer-Based Procedures

The nuclear industry is constantly trying to find ways to decrease the human error rate, especially the human errors associated with procedure use. As a step toward the goal of improving procedure use performance, researchers, together with the nuclear industry, have been looking at replacing the current paper-based procedures with computer-based procedure systems. The concept of computer-based procedures is not new by any means; however most research has focused on procedures used in the main control room. Procedures reviewed in these efforts are mainly emergency operating procedures and normal operating procedures. Based on lessons learned for these previous efforts we are now exploring a more unknown application for computer based procedures - field procedures, i.e. procedures used by nuclear equipment operators and maintenance technicians. The Idaho National Laboratory, the Institute for Energy Technology, and participants from the U.S. commercial nuclear industry are collaborating in an applied research effort with the objective of developing requirements and specifications for a computer-based procedure system to be used by field operators. The goal is to identify the types of human errors that can be mitigated by using computer-based procedures and how to best design the computer-based procedures to do this. The underlying philosophy in the research effort is “Stop – Start – Continue”, i.e. what features from the use of paper-based procedures should we not incorporate (Stop), what should we keep (Continue), and what new features or work processes should be added (Start). One step in identifying the Stop – Start – Continue was to conduct a baseline study where affordances related to the current usage of paper-based procedures were identified. The purpose of the study was to develop a model of paper based procedure use which will help to identify desirable features for computer based procedure prototypes. Affordances such as note taking, markups, sharing procedures between fellow coworkers, the use of multiple procedures at once, etc. were considered. The model describes which affordances associated with paper based procedures should be transferred to computer-based procedures as well as what features should not be incorporated. The model also provides a means to identify what new features not present in paper based procedures need to be added to the computer-based procedures to further enhance performance. The next step is to use the requirements and specifications to develop concepts and prototypes of computer-based procedures. User tests and other data collection efforts will be conducted to ensure that the real issues with field procedures and their usage are being addressed and solved in the best manner possible. This paper describes the baseline study, the construction of the model of procedure use, and the requirements and specifications for computer-based procedures that were developed based on the model. It also addresses how the model and the insights gained from it were used to develop concepts and prototypes for computer based procedures

Computer–Based Procedures for Nuclear Power Plant Field Workers: Preliminary Results from Two Evaluation Studies

The Idaho National Laboratory and participants from the U.S. nuclear industry are collaborating on a research effort aimed to augment the existing guidance on computer-based procedure (CBP) design with specific guidance on how to design CBP user interfaces such that they support procedure execution in ways that exceed the capabilities of paper-based procedures (PBPs) without introducing new errors. Researchers are employing an iterative process where the human factors issues and interface design principles related to CBP usage are systematically addressed and evaluated in realistic settings. This paper describes the process of developing a CBP prototype and the two studies conducted to evaluate the prototype. The results indicate that CBPs may improve performance by reducing errors, but may increase the time it takes to complete procedural tasks

A Mid-Layer Model for Human Reliability Analysis: Understanding the Cognitive Causes of Human Failure Events

The Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research (RES) is sponsoring work in response to a Staff Requirements Memorandum (SRM) directing an effort to establish a single human reliability analysis (HRA) method for the agency or guidance for the use of multiple methods. As part of this effort an attempt to develop a comprehensive HRA qualitative approach is being pursued. This paper presents a draft of the method’s middle layer, a part of the qualitative analysis phase that links failure mechanisms to performance shaping factors. Starting with a Crew Response Tree (CRT) that has identified human failure events, analysts identify potential failure mechanisms using the mid-layer model. The mid-layer model presented in this paper traces the identification of the failure mechanisms using the Information-Diagnosis/Decision-Action (IDA) model and cognitive models from the psychological literature. Each failure mechanism is grouped according to a phase of IDA. Under each phase of IDA, the cognitive models help identify the relevant performance shaping factors for the failure mechanism. The use of IDA and cognitive models can be traced through fault trees, which provide a detailed complement to the CRT