Human factors requires modeling techniques that capture how cognition and behavior are sensitive to environmental design. As such, techniques such as Anderson's rational analysis and Brunswik's lens model framework should be of interest to human performance modelers because they provide ways to analyze tasks and behavior as adaptive to environmental structure. We briefly describe both techniques and contrast them in the context of modeling visual search behavior. We conclude that these techniques can provide complementary resources for human performance modeling in human factors.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonJ. R. (1990). The adaptive character of thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
2.
AndersonJ. R. (1991a). Is human cognition adaptive?Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 14(3), 471–485.
3.
AndersonJ.R. (1991b). The adaptive nature of human categorization. Psychological Review. 98, 409–429.
4.
AndersonJ. R.LebiereC. (1998). The atomic components of thought. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
5.
AraujoC.KowlerE.PavelM. (2001). Eye movements during visual search: The costs of choosing the optimal path. Vision Research, 41, 3613–3625.
6.
BrunswikE. (1956). Perception and the representative design of the psychological experiments. Berkeley: University of California Press.
7.
ByrneM. D.KirlikA.FickC. S. (2006). Kilograms matter: Rational analysis, ecological rationality, and computational cognitive modeling of dynamic system control. In KirlikA. (Ed.) Adaptive perspectives on human-technology interaction: Models and methods for cognitive engineering and human-computer interaction.New York: Oxford University Press.
8.
CookseyR. W. (1996). Judgment analysis: Theory, methods, and applications. San Diego: Academic Press.
9.
GibsonJ.J. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
10.
GrayW.D. (2006). The emerging rapprochement between cognitive and ecological analyses. In KirlikA. (Ed.) Adaptive perspectives on human-technology interaction: Models and methods for cognitive engineering and human-computer interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.
11.
HammondK. R.StewartT. (2001). The essential Brunswik. New York: Oxford University Press.
12.
KirlikA. (in press). Ecological resources for modeling interactive behavior and embedded cognition. In GrayW.D. (Ed.) Integrated models of cognitive systems. New York: Oxford University Press.
13.
KirlikA. (2006). Adaptive perspectives on human-technology interaction: Methods and models for cognitive engineering and human-computer interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.
14.
MillerS.M.KirlikA.KosorukoffA.ByrneM.A. (2004). Ecological validity as a mediator of visual attention allocation in human-machine systems. University of Illinois Human Factors Division Technical Report AHFD-04-17/NASA-04-6. Available from: http://www.humanfactors.uiuc.edu/research/pubIndex.aspx.
15.
MorayN. (1986). Monitoring behavior and supervisory control. In BoffK.KaufmannI.BeattyJ. (Eds.) Handbook of perception and human performance. New York: Wiley.
16.
PirolliP. (2006). The use of proximal information scent to forage for distal content on the World Wide Web. In KirlikA. (Ed.) Adaptive perspectives on human-technology interaction: Models and methods for cognitive engineering and human-computer interaction. New York: Oxford University Press.
17.
SalvucciD. D. (2006). Modeling driver behavior in a cognitive architecture. Human Factors, 48, 362–380.
18.
SendersJ. W. (1964). The human operator as a monitor and controller of multidegree of freedom systems. IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, HFE-5, 2–5.
19.
SimonH.A. (1956). Rational choice and the structure of environments. Psychological Review, 63. 129–138.
20.
WickensC. D.GohJ.HellebergJHorreyW.J.TalleurD.A. (2003). Attentional models of multitask pilot performance using advanced display technology. Human Factors45(3), 360–380.
