The research-practice relationship in ergonomics and human factors – surveying and bridging the gap

Abstract

Significant discord has been aired regarding the widening research-practice gap in several disciplines (e.g. psychology, healthcare), especially with reference to research published in academic journals. The research-practice gap has profound and wide-ranging implications for the adequacy of ergonomics and human factors (E/HF) research and the implementation of research findings into practice. However, no substantive research on this issue has been identified in E/HF. Using an online questionnaire, practitioners were asked about their application of scientific research findings published in peer-reviewed journals and to suggest ways to improve research application in practice. A total of 587 usable responses were collected, spanning 46 countries. This article describes some of the key differences and correlations concerning reading, usefulness and barriers to application among respondents, who varied in terms of organisational type, percentage of work time devoted to application vs. research, society membership and experience. Various solutions proposed by the survey respondents on ways to bridge the research-practice gap are discussed. STATEMENT OF RELEVANCE: The relationship between research and practice in E/HF has long been a subject of discussion, with commentators pointing to tension and possible implications for the adequacy of the discipline. Findings from a cross-sectional survey provide ergonomics practitioners' views on research, leading to discussion of strategies for achieving better integration.

Human factors and ergonomics methods in practice: three fundamental constraints

“…These recommendations align with the most frequent suggestions to HF/E researchers and practitioners made by HF/E specialists in the survey by Chung and Shorrock (2011), namely:…”

“…The importance of this constraint is highlighted in a survey of 587 HF/E professionals by Chung and Shorrock (2011). Participants were asked to rate 29 statements concerning current barriers to their application of HF/E research findings, as a practitioner.…”

“…Shorrock and Kirwan 2002;Isaac, Shorrock, and Kirwan 2002;Isaac et al 2003;Shorrock 2005); safety assessment (Clark, Shorrock, and Turley 2008;Williams , Haslam, and Weiss 2008); human factors integration (Shorrock, Woldring, and Hughes 2004;Shorrock and Woldring 2006); human factors assessment (Jones et al 2003); managing system disturbances (Shorrock and Str€ ater 2004;Shorrock and Straeter 2006); and safety culture Shorrock 2012;Reader et al 2015;Noort et al 2016). One of the authors also has experience in the formal evaluation of HF/E methods (Olsen and Shorrock 2010;Shorrock 2003), and in research on the research-practice relationship (Chung and Shorrock 2011). As such, and in combination with our experience of teaching university students to use HF/E methods, we have encountered issues from various perspectives, and have seen what has worked and what has not, concerning methods developed and used by ourselves and others.…”

The academic–practitioner gap in Spanish library and information science: An analysis of authorship and collaboration in two leading national publications

“…Echoes of the discussion can also be found in other fields, including political sciences and administration (Bushouse et al, 2011), management and business sciences (Chanal, 2012;Mesny and Mailhot, 2010), ergonomics (Chung and Shorrock, 2011), education (Greenwood and Abbott, 2001) and social work (Hudgins and Allen-Meares, 2014). Finally, beyond specific disciplines, the recognized need to achieve the best possible relationship between university and business or publicservice activity (Thune, 2007) means the global dimension of the issue under consideration must be acknowledged.…”

Bridging the gap between ergonomics methods research and practice: Methodological Issues in Ergonomics Science Part II

“…The focus of many of the articles in part II of the special issue turns to one of the thorny issues that threatens the quality and validity of ergonomics work: the so-called research-practice gap (Chung and Shorrock 2011;Underwood and Waterson 2014). This gap is characterised by discrepancies between the methodologies that ergonomics researchers and practitioners are applying in response to the same issues.…”