Design cycles for rapidly-evolving systems such as information and communication technology (ICT) are too short to allow for long-term deliberation. We need means to learn about how people adapt to change and uncertainty and how complex systems behave. We also need to learn how to elicit and understand true expertise in work settings and make it useable for others. The value of cognitive systems engineering (CSE) lies in the ability to understand domain semantics, reveal expertise, and derive essential features for adaptive systems. Insights from cognitive researchers who have substantial firsthand experience with the study of human performance in complex, uncertain work settings demonstrate the current state of CSE and the potential for CSE to reveal how people adapt to change and uncertainty and how complex systems behave. This has implications for the development of resilient systems.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CarrollJ.HatakenakaS.RudolphJ. (2006). Naturalistic decision making and organizational decision making: Exploring the intersections. In LipshitzR.KleinG.CarrollJ., Special issue on Naturalistic Decision Making and Organizational Decision Making: Exploring the Intersections. Organization Studies. 27(7): 1037–1057.
2.
CookR.WoodsD. (1994). Operating at the sharp end: The complexity of human error. In BognerS.Human Error in Medicine. Hilllsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.255–310.
3.
GershJ. R.McNeelyJ. A.RemingtonR. W. (2005). Cognitive engineering: Understanding human interaction with complex systems. Johns Hopkins APL Technical Digest. 26(4): 377–382.
4.
HollnagelE. (1993). The phenotype of erroneous actions. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies39, 1–32.
5.
HollnagelE.WoodsD. (1983). Cognitive Systems Engineering: New wine in new bottles. Int J Human-Computer Studies. 18: 583–600.
JohanssonB.HollnagelE. (2006). Pre-requisites for large scale coordination. In NemethC.Special Issue on Large-Scale Coordination. Cognition, Technology and Work. 9(1): 5–13.
8.
MendonçaD.BeroggiG.WallaceW. (2001). Decision support for improvisation during emergency response operations. Intl J of Emerg Mgt. 1(1): 30–38.
9.
MillitelloLPattersonE.BowmanLWearsR. (2007). Information flow during crisis management: Challenges to coordination in the emergency operations center. In NemethC.Special Issue on Large-Scale Coordination. Cognition, Technology and Work. 9(1): 25–31.
10.
NemethC. (2005, September). Large Scale Coordination: The Study of Groups at Work. Procedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomic Society Annual Meeting. Orlando. 527–528.
11.
NemethC.CookR.WoodsD. (2004). The Messy Details: Insights from Technical Work in Healthcare. In NemethC.CookR.WoodsD.Special Issue on Studies in Healthcare Technical Work. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics-Part A. 34:6. 689–692.
12.
NemethC.O'ConnorM.KlockP. A.CookR. I. (2006). Discovering Healthcare Cognition: The use of cognitive artifacts to reveal cognitive work. In LipshitzR.Special Issue on Naturalistic Decision Making. Organization Studies. 27(7): 1011–1035.
13.
NemethC.WearsR.WoodsD.HollnagelE.CookR.Minding the Gaps: Creating Resilience in Healthcare. In HendriksenK.Advances in Patient Safety: New Directions and Alternative Approaches. Washington, DC: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. (in press).
14.
NormanD. (1981). Steps toward a cognitive engineering: System images, system friendliness, mental models. Symposium on Models of Human Performance. Office of Naval Research Contractor's Meeting. LaJolla, CA. University of California, San Diego. June 19.
15.
PattersonE. S.WoodsD. D.CookR. I.RenderM. L. (2007). Collaborative Cross-Checking to Enhance Resilience. In NemethC.Special Issue on Large-Scale Coordination. Cognition, Technology and Work. 9(3). 155–162.
16.
PewR.MavorA. (2007). Human Systems Integration in the System Development Process: A New Look. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
17.
RasmussenJ. (1986). Information Processing and Human-Machine Interaction. New York. North-Holland.
18.
RothE.MulterJ.RaslearT. (2006). Shared situation awareness as a contributor to high reliability performance in railroad operations. In LipshitzR.KleinG.CarrollJ., Special issue on Naturalistic Decision Making and Organizational Decision Making: Exploring the Intersections. Organization Studies. 27(7): 967–988.
19.
WoodsD. (2000). Studying Cognitive Systems in Context: The Cognitive Systems Triad. Institute for Ergonomics, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH. Retreived on 30 April 2005 from CSEL web site: http://csel.eng.ohio-state.edu/productions/;woodscta/.
20.
WoodsDRothE. (1988). Cognitive Systems Engineering. In HelanderM.Handbook of Human-Computer Interaction. Amsterdam: North-Holland.3–43.
21.
XiaoY.LasomeC.MossJ.MackenzieC.FarajS. (2001). Cognitive properties of a whiteboard: A case study in a trauma centre. Proceedings of the seventh conference on European Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work. Bonn. 259–278.
