Human-Related Risks in the Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) of Hollow Railway Axles: Implications for the Education and Training of the NDT Personnel

Bertovic, Marija

doi:10.3850/978-981-11-2724-3_1058-cd

Cited by 5 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, the generalizability to real operational tasks conducted by experienced operators might be challenged. However, the fact that a lack of redundancy effect has also been reported in anecdotal reports from the field (Armitage, 2008; Bertovic, 2015) suggests that these effects are not limited to the laboratory. While such criticism might not fully be ruled out, we would at least perceive our results as providing some initial hints about possible risks of social loafing in sequentially redundant work settings, depending on the kind of implementation (blinded–nonblinded) and position of the checker (first vs. second).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

“…However, little is known about whether social loafing also occurs in sequential redundancy . A few anecdotal reports from the field (Bertovic, 2015) and a couple of interview studies (Armitage, 2008; Dickinson et al, 2010) do indeed hint at social loafing in sequential human redundancy. Nevertheless, despite being the prevalent form of redundancy in real-world settings, only a few experimental studies have thus far investigated the specific effects of sequential human redundancy on performance, with a somewhat inconsistent pattern of results.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sequential human redundancy: Can social loafing diminish the safety of double checks?

Cymek¹,

Manzey²

2022

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is often assumed that if two people work on a failure-detection task one after the other, they will observe more failures than when only one person undertakes the task (4-eyes principle). However, human beings have also been found to exert less effort on tasks that they share responsibility for, a phenomenon called social loafing. In the current research, we assessed the effectiveness of sequential human redundancy in light of possible social loafing. In two laboratory experiments, teams of two participants performed a qualitycontrol task in a blinded and in a nonblinded condition, operationally defined by whether or not evaluations of the first checker were forwarded to the second one. In the blinded condition, no social loafing was found, and a near-perfect overall team performance was observed. In contrast, nonblinded redundancy led to a substantial effort reduction of the second checker. However, despite this social-loafing effect at the second position, even nonblinded redundancy led to an overall safety advantage over a single-checker condition. Our research suggests that social loafing in sequential-human-redundancy work settings can occur but does not necessarily reduce the gains in overall reliability. Blinded processes, however, seem to provoke less social loafing than nonblinded processes. Public Significance StatementDouble checks are generally implemented to enhance safety. This research found that specific implementations of double-check processes may lead to reduced individual effort and may therefore limit the positive impact double checks theoretically might have.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 78%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Sequential human redundancy: Can social loafing diminish the safety of double checks?

Cymek¹,

Manzey²

2022

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…e.g. Bertovic, 2015 [1]), its repetition is warranted since a negative view of human input in MTO systems as being inferior to that of machines persists in some areas. Humans offer unique qualities that machines and software do not have.…”

Section: Definitionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The prototype system that is introduced in this paper can provide visual summaries of the human factors (HF) that are implicated in such errors in a scalable form, so that the information it delivers can be used in a variety of contexts, by decision makers in technical management, by research and development (R&D) teams, and by documentation authors, not to mention for helping to specify requirements for tailored training, providing, thus, valuable information for the prevention of future error. The main ongoing concern in the development of this system, which draws heavily on previous theoretical and practical work of Bertovic et al [1][2][3][4], Müller et al [5], D'Agostino et al [6], and Fahlbruch and Wilpert et al [7][8][9], has been to find a way of quickly collecting risk-related data and automatically categorising that data in terms of human factors to create a holistic overview of possible risks in specific NDT processes. Such data can come from prospective risk assessment tools such as the Human-FMEA, but could just as well come from post-incident analyses.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An automatic system for categorizing and quantifying human factors

Given

2023

8th International Workshop on Reliability of NDT/NDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human factors (HF) are little understood, and particularly in non-destructive testing (NDT) experimental data is rare, samples are often small, and statistical methods are rarely used to evaluate results [1]. HF have been widely implicated in major occurrences of technical failure, for example at North Anna power plant and on United Airlines Flight 232. Understanding HF is vital for reliable detection and prevention of failures. Reliability assessments, though known to be affected by intrinsic capability, application factors, and HF, have thus far only concentrated to a sufficient degree on intrinsic capability. The addition of HF to that assessment has proven difficult due to the lack of a method of quantifying HF. This paper presents the first attempt from a psychological perspective to quantify HF from qualitative data. HF data was derived from qualitative human-oriented Failure Modes and Effects Analysis (Human-FMEA) workshops for visual inspection of tunnels by laser scanning and for ultrasonic testing of welds. Data was collected on human failure modes, causes, consequences and preventive measures, as well as eliciting a risk priority number (RPN). Using this data, a system of quantitative weightings was created to allocate errors to inductively derived HF categories for further allocation to existing HF categorisation models. This weighting model proved useful for creating quantitative summaries of HF, informing and validating qualitative FMEA results, and comparing existing HF categorisation models. Further potential lies within a planned interface to quantitative reliability assessment methods such as POD (Probability of Detection). While providing quantifications, the method retains a qualitative and holistic nature, can, thus, bridge the gap between psychological and engineering concerns of HF and reliability, contributing to future interdisciplinary work.

show abstract

Data-Driven Ultrasonic Non-Destructive Evaluation of Pipes and Welds in the Context of the Oil and Gas Industry

FERREIRA¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Human-Related Risks in the Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) of Hollow Railway Axles: Implications for the Education and Training of the NDT Personnel

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Sequential human redundancy: Can social loafing diminish the safety of double checks?

Sequential human redundancy: Can social loafing diminish the safety of double checks?

An automatic system for categorizing and quantifying human factors

Data-Driven Ultrasonic Non-Destructive Evaluation of Pipes and Welds in the Context of the Oil and Gas Industry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About