Standardized tests for the evaluation and classification of workload metrics

Shingledecker, Clark A.; Crabtree, Mark S.; Acton, William H.

doi:10.1037/e574002012-014

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Another theory (Wickens, 1991) takes a somewhat different approach in supporting the notion that these resources exist, but that they are differentiated among multiple "stores" of resources. The strongest empirical support is for a multiple capacity model (Shingledecker, Crabtree, & Acton, 1982). One of the most accepted multiple capacity theories is Wicken's multiple resource theory (MRT) (1991).…”

Section: Workloadmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In addition to verifying the validity of the adapted NASA-TLX, a test should also be designed to ensure the usefulness of the metric as described by Sanders and McCormick. For the metric to be be useful, it should tell the experimenter something he/she did not already know. Shingledecker, Crabtree, and Acton (1982) and Sanders and McCormick (1993) describe a useful mental workload metric as having five basic criteria. These criteria will be used as the organizational framework for the recommended experimental testing of the validity of the adapted NASA-TLX:…”

Section: Validation Of the Adapted Nasa-tlxmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Measures of mental workload can be divided into three broad areas: physiological, performance/behavioral, and subjective measures (Mitchell, 2000;Whitaker, Hahus, & BirkmirePeters, 1997;Shingledecker, Crabtree, & Acton, 1982). Wilson and Eggemeier (1994) and O'Donnell and Eggemeier (1986) provide excellent guidance in the selection and use of the various workload measures.…”

Section: Workload Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The designers would have to develop or adapt new ways to measure auditory workload and methods to scale the information gathered so that it is useful. The new metric would then have to be validated and proven reliable, sensitive, selective, and acceptable to the user community (Shingledecker, Crabtree, & Acton, 1982;Sanders & McCormick, 1993).…”

Section: Using a New Or Existing Measurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Auditory Workload Assessment, Volume 1

Rench¹

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Workloadmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Validation Of the Adapted Nasa-tlxmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Workload Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Using a New Or Existing Measurementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Auditory Workload Assessment, Volume 1

Rench¹

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The visual task used in Experiment 1 was the CTS unstable tracking task from Shingledecker et al (1982).…”

Section: Visual Taskmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Speech Intelligibility Level on Concurrent Visual Task Performance

et al. 1994

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Four experiments were performed to determine if changes in the level of speech intelligibility in an auditory task have an impact on performance in concurrent visual tasks. The auditory task used in each experiment was a memory search task in which subjects memorized a set of words and then decided whether authority presented probe items were members of the memorized set. The visual tasks used were an unstable tracking task, a spatial decision-making task, a mathematical reasoning task, and a probability monitoring task. Results showed that performance on the unstable tracking and probability monitoring tasks was unaffected by the level of speech intelligibility on the auditory task, whereas accuracy in the spatial decision-making and mathematical processing tasks was significantly worse at low speech intelligibility levels. The findings are interpreted within the framework of multiple resource theory.

show abstract

Five‐dimensional taxonomy to relate human errors and technological interventions in a human factors literature database

Rantanen

Palmer

Wiegmann

et al. 2006

J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One of the main factors in all aviation accidents is human error. Therefore, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Aviation Safety Program (AvSP) has identified several human factors safety technologies to address this problem. Some technologies directly address human error either by attempting to reduce the occurrence of errors or by mitigating the negative consequences of errors. However, new technologies and system changes may also introduce new error opportunities or even induce different types of errors. Consequently, a thorough understanding of the relationship between error classes and technology "fixes" is crucial for the evaluation of intervention strategies outlined in the AvSP so that resources can be effectively directed to maximize the benefit to flight safety. This article summarizes efforts to map intervention technologies onto error categories and describes creation of a conceptual framework, identification of applicable taxonomies for each dimension of the framework, and construction of a usable prototype database. The framework consists of a three-dimensional matrix with axes for the human operator, the task, and the environment. Human errors and technologies cohabit molecules in the matrix linking them. The database allows for taxonomic development in all three areas pertaining to human performance by keeping the taxonomies dynamic.

show abstract

Standardized tests for the evaluation and classification of workload metrics

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Auditory Workload Assessment, Volume 1

Auditory Workload Assessment, Volume 1

Effects of Speech Intelligibility Level on Concurrent Visual Task Performance

Five‐dimensional taxonomy to relate human errors and technological interventions in a human factors literature database

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About