1 / 9

Week 2-1: The State of Human Factors (Part 2)

Week 2-1: The State of Human Factors (Part 2). Week 2-1 Readings & Questions. Readings Meister (2003) Questions What is the state of our knowledge in HF? How well is HF knowledge progressing? How well is HF knowledge being applied to technological design?

hsimons
Download Presentation

Week 2-1: The State of Human Factors (Part 2)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Week 2-1: The State of Human Factors (Part 2)

  2. Week 2-1 Readings & Questions • Readings • Meister (2003) • Questions • What is the state of our knowledge in HF? • How well is HF knowledge progressing? • How well is HF knowledge being applied to technological design? • What factors impede or facilitate the progress and application of HF knowledge?

  3. Meister’s (2002) Self Examination • Self-examination and some dissatisfaction are needed to advance the discipline. • Questions to ask: • How well can we predict? • Does our work significantly improve design? • Do our theories expand understanding of the human/systems interaction?

  4. What has changed in 25 years? • From a review of the Proceedings of the HFES conference  Not much • What has remained the same: • Reliance (if not increased reliance) on the experiment 64% in 1974, 80% in 1999. • Very little written about system design and development (10%  6%) • Limited development of theory (19%  24%) • Limited applications of research findings (23% 34%) “airy abstractions” • Tightly constrained studies with clear-cut stimuli (68%  58%) • More emphasis on molecular than molar issues.

  5. What has changed in 25 years? • From a review of the Proceedings of the HFES conference  Not much • What has changed • Increased emphasis on empirical research to non-empirical (tutorial/case history/analysis) papers (1974: 30-70%, respectively; 1999  70-30%) • More emphasis on molecular (workstations, interfaces) than molar (system-oriented) issues (38%  24%)

  6. Goals of HF • Support understanding of the relationship between humans and their technology • Aid in the design and development of human-machine systems • Can data collected to address the first goal be used for the second goal as well?

  7. Applying Research Results to Systems? • If HF research cannot be used in the design process, it has little value. • The lack of applicability might stem from the dominance by academics and experimental methods. • Experimental methods produce experimental data that are often difficult to apply.

  8. Academic dominance • Represents a natural progression of the discipline. • Academic institutions are the recipients of government funding. • Academics have as a requirement the need to publish. • Journals prefer academic methods. • Old research is the most common stimulus for new research.

  9. Self Examination • To advance, we must understand how we know what we know (epistemology). • The “automatic” methods cannot be simply applied to solve design problems. • To advance, we must be willing to ask ourselves if HF research has value.

More Related