Operator Monitoring during Normal Operations: Vigilance or Problem-Solving?

Abstract

Monitoring during emergencies in dynamic environments is widely recognized to be an active, selective attention, process. In contrast monitoring during normal operations is often thought to more closely resemble a vigilance task. This paper describes a field study of power plant operator monitor during normal operations. We observed and interviewed 27 operators at two different plants for a total of over 200 hours. Despite differences in control room technology, we found that in both cases operators devised active strategies to remove or reduce meaningless changes from the interface, create information different from that intended by the designers, and make important information more salient. These findings were integrated into a model of operator monitoring, that emphasizes operators' use of strategies for knowledge-driven monitoring and proactive adaptation of the control room interface. The model is equally applicable for normal and emergency operations and underscores the commonality in cognitive demands in both environments.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Cook

R. I.

(1996). Adapting to new technology in the operating room. Human Factors, 38, 593–613.

Jordan

Henderson

(1995). Interaction analysis: Foundations and practice. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 4, 39–103.

Moray

(1986). Monitoring behavior and supervisory control. In Boff

K. R.

Kaufmann

Thomas

J. P.

(Eds.), Handbook of human perception and human performance, vol. II: Cognitive processes and performance (40–1–40–51). New York: Wiley.

Mumaw

R. J.

Roth

E. M.

Vicente

K. J.

Burns

C. M.

(1995). Cognitive contributions to operator monitoring during normal operations (AECB Final Contract Report). Pittsburgh, PA: Westinghouse Science & Technology Center.

Mumaw

Roth

Vicente

Burns

(1996). A model of operator cognition and performance during monitoring in normal operations. (Final Report: AECB-2.376.3). Pittsburgh, PA: Westinghouse STC.

Obradovich

J. H.

Woods

D. D.

(1996). Users as designers: How people cope with poor HCl design in computer-based medical devices. Human Factors, 38, 574–592.

Orasanu

(1993), Decision-making in the cockpit. In Wiener

Kanki

Helmreich

(Eds.), Cockpit resource management (pp. 137–172). New York: Academic Press.

Roth

E. M.

Analysis of Decision-Making in Nuclear Power Plant Emergencies: A Naturalistic Decision Making Approach. In Zsambok

Klein

(Eds.) Naturalistic Decision-Making, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1997.

Roth

E. M.

Mumaw

R. J.

Lewis

P. M.

(1994). An Empirical Investigation of Operator Performance in Cognitively Demanding Simulated Emergencies, Washington D. C.: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (NUREG/CR-6208).

10.

Sanderson

P. M.

Fisher

(1994). Exploratory sequential data analysis: Foundations. Human-Computer Interaction, 9, 251–317.

11.

Vicente

K. J.

Burns

C. M.

Mumaw

R. J.

Roth

E. M.

(1996). How do operators monitor a nuclear power plant? A field study. In Proceedings of the 1996 American Nuclear Society International Topical Meeting on Nuclear Plant Instrumentation, Control and Human-Machine Interface Technologies (pp. 1127–1134). LaGrange Park, IL: ANS.

12.

Vicente

K. J.

Moray

Lee

J. D.

Rasmussen

Jones

B. G.

Brock

Djemil

(1996). Evaluation of a Rankine cycle display for nuclear power plant monitoring and diagnosis. Human Factors, 38, 506–521.

13.

Watts

Woods

D. D.

Corban

Patterson

Kerr

R. L.

Hicks

L. C.

(1996). Voice loops as cooperative aids in space shuttle mission control. Proceedings of the 1996 ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work, 48–57.

14.

Woods

D. D.

(1994). Cognitive demands and activities in dynamic fault management: abductive reasoning and disturbance management. In Stanton

Human Factors in Alarm Design. London: Taylor & Francis Ltd.

15.

Woods

D. D.

Wise

J. A.

Hanes

L. F.

(1982), Evaluation of safety parameter display concepts (Final Report NP-2239), Palo Alto, CA: Electric Power Research Institute.