Analysis Techniques For Man-Machine Systems Design
Analysis Techniques For Man-Machine Systems Design Analysis Techniques For Man-Machine Systems Design
NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/7 - 114 -Volume 211. Rasmussen, J., Duncan, K., & Leplat. J. (1987). New technology and human error. Chichcstcr John Wiley &Sons. New Tcchnology and Work Scries.12. Reason. 1. (1987). Generic crror-modelling system (GEMS): a cognitive framework for locating common humanerror forms. In J. Rasmussen, K.Duncan, & J. Leplat (Eds.), New tchnolocy and human error. Chichester: JohnWiley & Sons. New Technology and Work Series.13. Reason, J. (1990). Human error. Cambridge University Press.14. Rouse, W.B. (1990). Designing for human error: Concepts for error tolerant systems. In H.R. Booher (Ed.),MANPRINT: An anproach to systems intedration. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.15. Stoop, J. (1990). Redesign of bridge layout and equipment for fishing vessels. The Journal of Navigation 43 (2).16. Woodson. W.E. (1981). Human factors design handbook, (pp. 985-991). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.NATO UNCLASSIFIED- 114 -
NATO UNCLASSIFIED115 - AC 243(Panel-8)TR/ 7i 15 Volume 25.8 ANALYSIS OF HUMAN ERRORS AS CAUSAL FACTORS INACCIDENTSWhat the technique doesThe analysis of how an accident happened can be represented by a network. Events leading to an accident are connectedby logical AND/OR gates, revealing the causal factors. In the case of AND-gates. the related deviations fromnormative performance all need to be present for the occurrence of the accidenL In the case of OR-gates, there is onlyone factor deviating from the normative approach needed. The transmission from the accident description to theschematized network of AND/OR gates is dependent on the interpretation of the described data. The approach isprimarily relevant if a number of accidents, for instance more than 100, are reported. The analysis of factors, after theprocess of indicating the chain of events leading to an accident, will show factors to remedy accidents byimprovement of hardware and software design, operational procedures, and selection and training procedures.Inputs to the techniqueDescriptions of a number of accidents (at least 100)suitable for interpretation to provide data to generate acausal network.Outputs of the techniqueThe approach produces a set of causal factors.When to useBecause of the need to develop the data base over a long period, the technique should not be restricted to applicationwithin any one project development cycle. The technique should be used early in the design phases of a specificsystem to identify possible human factors leading to accidents.Related techniquesFault tree analysis techniques.Resources requiredThe technique can be used with only a paper and pencil. It requires access to a collection of consistently reportedaccident and incident data. Analysts may develop their own networks of causal factors, or use an established taxonomyof human errors (e.g., Feggetter, 1982; Rasmussen, 1982).AdvantagesDisadvantagesThe technique provides a set of causal factors suitable for The interpretation of accidents is subjective. Theremedying design-induced error.descriptions of the accidents may suffer frominsufficiencies in data collection and recording. The use ofan established causal network may influence the collectionand reporting of data. Retrospective reviews of accidentreports do not incorporate the knowledge of the personsinvolved.NATO UNCLASSIFIED1 IC%
- Page 178 and 179: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8'tTR
- Page 180 and 181: N ATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8')T
- Page 182 and 183: NATO UNCLASShi Ih I t LUAC/243(Pane
- Page 184 and 185: NATO UNCLASSIFIED,AC/243(Panel 8 TR
- Page 186 and 187: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 188 and 189: NATO UNCLASSIFTEDAC/243(Panel 8')TR
- Page 190 and 191: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8')TR
- Page 192 and 193: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 194 and 195: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 196 and 197: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8')TR
- Page 198 and 199: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8ITR/
- Page 200 and 201: NATO UNCLASSIFIUEUAC/243(Panel 8)TR
- Page 202 and 203: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 204 and 205: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 206 and 207: t NATO UNCLASSIFlEDAC/243(Panel 8)T
- Page 208 and 209: NATO UNoCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR
- Page 210 and 211: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 212 and 213: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 214 and 215: NATO UN CL A S SIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8
- Page 216 and 217: NATO UNCLAS.SIFI.EDAC/243(Panei 8Vo
- Page 218 and 219: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 220 and 221: fl1106AC/243(Panel 8'TR/7- 106Volum
- Page 222 and 223: NATO UNCLASSIFIED -AC/243(Panel 8)T
- Page 224 and 225: .N AI U N C L A Itt110iAC/243(Panel
- Page 226 and 227: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 230 and 231: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 232 and 233: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 234 and 235: ] NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)T
- Page 236 and 237: VNATO UNCLASSIFIED;-AC/243(Panel 8'
- Page 238 and 239: NATO UNCLASSIFIED1111wAC/243(Panel
- Page 240 and 241: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
- Page 242 and 243: NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/ 24 3 (Pane l 8
- Page 244 and 245: NATo I UNCLASSIFEDAC/243(Panel 8'IT
- Page 246 and 247: NATO ITNCLASSIUI:EDAC/243(panel 81T
- Page 248 and 249: NATO U.NCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR
- Page 250 and 251: NATO INCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel- 8LTR
- Page 252 and 253: NATO I rNC'LASSTFIEDAC/243(Panel 82
- Page 254 and 255: NATONTCLaSSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8\TR/7
- Page 256 and 257: NATO UNCLASSIiE:DAC/243(Panel 8Y1TR
- Page 258 and 259: o ndesel pre-lubrication (D)compres
- Page 260 and 261: NATO I rNCT-AS S ITfEDAC/243(Panel
- Page 262 and 263: NATO ITNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR
- Page 264 and 265: NATO IrNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR
- Page 266 and 267: NATO UINCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR
- Page 268 and 269: NATO) I INCI.ASSllHTlDAC/243(Panel
- Page 270 and 271: o n* (D L4COP1RORDIAm CTiMMINCA1-CO
- Page 272 and 273: (DREFI..11.1 ,CC) WEATHE RDATAft EN
- Page 274 and 275: NATO tTNC>LAM0-~E-DC/4(ae TR7 32Vo
- Page 276 and 277: NATO UNCLASSIF"EDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/
NATO UNCLASSIFIEDAC/243(Panel 8)TR/7 - 114 -Volume 211. Rasmussen, J., Duncan, K., & Leplat. J. (1987). New technology and human error. Chichcstcr John Wiley &Sons. New Tcchnology and Work Scries.12. Reason. 1. (1987). Generic crror-modelling system (GEMS): a cognitive framework for locating common humanerror forms. In J. Rasmussen, K.Duncan, & J. Leplat (Eds.), New tchnolocy and human error. Chichester: JohnWiley & Sons. New Technology and Work Series.13. Reason, J. (1990). Human error. Cambridge University Press.14. Rouse, W.B. (1990). <strong>Design</strong>ing for human error: Concepts for error tolerant systems. In H.R. Booher (Ed.),MANPRINT: An anproach to systems intedration. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.15. Stoop, J. (1990). Redesign of bridge layout and equipment for fishing vessels. The Journal of Navigation 43 (2).16. Woodson. W.E. (1981). Human factors design handbook, (pp. 985-991). New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.NATO UNCLASSIFIED- 114 -