2017 IEEE International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management (IEEM) 2017
DOI: 10.1109/ieem.2017.8290078
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Applying the purdue pegboard to evaluate precision assembly performance

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…PPT has been previously described as more sensitive than the nine-hole peg test in detecting changes in manual dexterity, especially in healthy subjects [55]. Little improvements in the finger tapping test and bimanual tasks were found in the control group, probably as a result of a learning effect caused by the repetition of the test three times in one week [56].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…PPT has been previously described as more sensitive than the nine-hole peg test in detecting changes in manual dexterity, especially in healthy subjects [55]. Little improvements in the finger tapping test and bimanual tasks were found in the control group, probably as a result of a learning effect caused by the repetition of the test three times in one week [56].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%
“…In addition, the movements were designed according to activities of daily living, which means that these tasks were easy to perform for individuals without any upper extremity disability; (B) the Purdue Pegboard Test results were rendered, which meant that the results of the PPT could not offer details on each segment’s upper extremity abilities. Therefore, each individual might apply different strategies during the test, and the same individual might even apply different strategies in each object-picking process; (C) there were ceiling effects and learning effects in healthy individuals conducting the Purdue Pegboard Test ( Tseng et al, 2017 ); (D) movement smoothness (LDLJ) was calculated using the period of the movement unit and the acceleration change during the movement unit. Therefore, LDLJ and the Purdue Pegboard Test might not correlate highly with each other.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At baseline, participants' ability to acquire manual skills was assessed using the Purdue Pegboard manual dexterity test (Tiffin, 1968;Tiffin & Asher, 1948;Tseng et al, 2017). In summary, the test involved placing as many pegs as possible into a pegboard for 30 s using: (1) dominant hand, (2) non-dominant hand (3) both hands simultaneously, and (4) assembling units of pegs, washers and collars for one minute using both hands.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%