Error mode prediction

Hollnagel, Erik; Kaarstad, Magnhild

doi:10.1080/001401399184811

Cited by 41 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…It may be that the ergonomics community is largely unaware of the lack of data (Stanton and Young 1998) or assumes that the methods provide their own validity (Stanton and Young 1999b). Hollnagel et al (1999) argue that either we are faced with elegant theory without error prediction (e.g. Reason 1990) or error prediction without any underpinning theory (e.g.…”

Section: Validation Of Human Error Identification Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kirwan 1994). Hollnagel et al (1999) call for a bridge between theory and practice. We certainly sympathise with this call and it is central to the aims of the present paper.…”

Section: Validation Of Human Error Identification Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We certainly sympathise with this call and it is central to the aims of the present paper. In analysing the Cognitive Reliability and Error Analysis Method (CREAM), Hollnagel et al (1999) claim a 68.6% match between predicted outcomes and actual outcomes.…”

Section: Validation Of Human Error Identification Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Validating task analysis for error identification: reliability and validity of a human error prediction technique

Stanton

Baber

2005

Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reports on the theoretical and empirical developments for an error prediction methodology called Task analysis For Error Identification (TAFEI). Other researchers have noted the need for theoretically-driven approaches that are able to provide practical utility in error prediction. Theoretical developments include the concept of 'rewritable routines', that describes the loop between cognitive processing, action and devices states. This has been proposed as a way of unifying ideas from systems theory and cognitive psychology. The empirical research shows that TAFEI is superior to heuristic methods, which supports the idea that structured methods assist in error prediction. The validation study shows that TAFEI reaches acceptable levels in terms of test-retest reliability and concurrent validity. It is believed that the method has reached a level of maturity after ten years of development work. This is demonstrated by the many uses that the method has been put, including that of a design tool.KEYWORDS: human error, methodology, reliability, validity, sensitivity. Page 2Validating TAFEI 3 FOUNDATIONS OF TAFEIIn 1994, we introduced a technique for predicting human error when people use devices (Baber and Stanton 1994). The technique was called Task Analysis For Error Identification (TAFEI).The theoretical foundation for this approach was based upon the unification of ideas from general systems theory (von Bertalanffy 1950) and human problem solving (Miller et al. 1960, Hayes-Roth and Hayes-Roth 1979, Suchman 1987, Simon and Young 1988 resulting in a statespace search with boundaries between human and device elements. Initial attempts at validating the approach suggested that the errors predicted using TAFEI were relatively consistent with errors observed when people used the devices under consideration .During the past decade, our efforts have been directed towards consolidating the theory that underlies TAFEI. At the heart of this theory are the ideas of 'relevance' and 'rewritable routines ': we posit that in order to move from current to relevant states, eliminating other possible states, the user needs to retain some (temporary) record of the interaction and to have some means of assigning relevance to states . At each state, this record will be modified. We assume that the record will be held in working memory, presumably in the articulatory loop which has a limited duration (e.g., around two seconds, Baddeley 1986). This means that unless the record is updated, it will decay or be disrupted. This could result from distraction, e.g., interrupting the activity, or competition, e.g., having more than one option that appears relevant. As the record will also guide the next action, we see this as a rewritable routine. The current routine will be performed and the results used to update the record, in preparation for the next routine. To some extent this notion is similar to the 'partial provisional planning' hypothesis of Simon and Young (1988) and also resonates with the idea of a Page 3Valid...

show abstract

Section: Validation Of Human Error Identification Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Kirwan 1994). Hollnagel et al (1999) call for a bridge between theory and practice. We certainly sympathise with this call and it is central to the aims of the present paper.…”

Section: Validation Of Human Error Identification Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validating task analysis for error identification: reliability and validity of a human error prediction technique

Stanton

Baber

2005

Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hollnagel, Kaarstad and Lee [34] argue that either we are faced with elegant theory without error prediction [5] or error prediction without any underpinning theory [32]. He calls for a bridge between theory and practice.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We certainly sympathise with this call and it is central to the aims of the present paper. In analysing the Cognitive Reliability and Error Analysis Method (CREAM), Hollnagel et al [34] claim a 68.6% match between predicted outcomes and actual outcomes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Error by design: methods for predicting device usability

Stanton

Baber

2002

Design Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper introduces the idea of predicting 'designer error' by evaluating devices using Human Error Identification (HEI) techniques. This is demonstrated using Systematic Human Error Reduction and Prediction Approach (SHERPA) and Task Analysis for Error Identification (TAFEI) to evaluate a vending machine. Appraisal criteria which rely upon user opinion, face validity and utilisation are questioned. Instead a quantitative approach, based upon signal detection theory, is recommended. The performance of people using SHERPA and TAFEI are compared with heuristic judgement and each other. The results of these studies show that both SHERPA and TAFEI are better at predicting errors than the heuristic technique. The performance of SHERPA and TAFEI are comparable, giving some confidence in the use of these approaches. It is suggested that using HEI techniques as part of the design and evaluation process could help to make devices easier to use.

show abstract

Individual differences in failing to save everyday computing work

Jones

Martin

2003

Applied Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been argued that the study of human-computer interaction (HCI) tends to neglect the user without advanced skills, and the prediction (as opposed to classification) of human error. The present work aims to redress these balances by attempting to obtain a predictive understanding of variation in susceptibility to computing error in everyday life among non-specialist users. On rare occasions, people lose the computing work they are carrying out because they forget to save it. Is this a matter only of unfortunate chance? The results of two studies indicated that this is not so. In both cases, levels of naturally occurring computing losses were found to be significantly related to individuals' general levels of susceptibility to cognitive failure, assessed by the Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ), suggesting a possible explanation in terms of variation in attentional ability.

show abstract

Error mode prediction

Cited by 41 publications

References 6 publications

Validating task analysis for error identification: reliability and validity of a human error prediction technique

Validating task analysis for error identification: reliability and validity of a human error prediction technique

Error by design: methods for predicting device usability

Individual differences in failing to save everyday computing work

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About