Three aspects of visual inspection were considered in this study. The three aspects considered to effect inspection performance are (1) cognitive styles, (2) feedforward training (job aid), and (3) pacing. In this study, the Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT) was administered and the basic (control), static (self- pacing), and hybrid (systematic pacing) displays were used to investigate the pacing effect. The objective was to classify the inspectors into different categories via the MFFT based on their cognitive styles, and also to investigate inspection performance (accuracy and response time) affected by the job aids as cognitive styles. The results indicate that the MFFT is effective in all task conditions. The job aid was also found to have a positive impact on the overall performance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CairnsE.CammockT. (1978). Development of a more reliable version of the matching familiar figures test. Developmental Psychology, 14(5), 555-560.
2.
Carretero-DiosH.De los Santos-RoigM.Buela-CasalG. (2008). Influence of the difficulty of the matching familiar figures test-20 on the assessment of reflection-impulsivity: An item analysis. Learning and Individual Differences, 18, 505-508.
3.
Carretero-DiosH.De los Santos-RoigM.Buela-CasalG. (2009). Role of the matching familiar figures test-20 in the analysis of theoretical validity of the reflection-impulsivity: A study with personality. International Journal of Psychological Research, 2(1), 6-15.
4.
ChiC.-F.DruryC. G. (1998). Do people choose an optimal response criterion in an inspection task?IIE Transactions, 30, 257-266.
5.
CzajaS. J.DruryC. G. (1981). Training programs for inspection. Human Factors, 23(4), 473-484.
6.
DruryC. G. (1990). Visual search in industrial inspection. In BroganD. (Ed.), Visual search (pp. 263-276). London: Taylor & Francis.
7.
DruryC. G.GramopadhyeA. K. (1992). Training for visual inspection: Controlled studies and field implications. Proceedings of the Seventh Federal Aviation Administration Meeting on Human Factors Issues in Aircraft Maintenance and Inspection, Washington, DC: Office of Aviation Medicine, 135-146.
8.
DruryC. G. (1994). The speed-accuracy trade-off in industry. Ergonomics, 37, 747-763.
9.
DruryC. G.ChiC.-F. (1995). A test of economic models of stopping policy in visual search. IIE Transactions, 27, 382-393.
10.
GallweyT. J. (1982). Selection tests for visual inspection on a multiple fault type task. Ergonomics, 25, 1077-1092.
11.
GallweyT. J.DruryC. G. (1986). Task complexity in visual inspection. Human Factors, 28(5), 595-606.
12.
GramopadhyeA. K.DruryC. G.PrabhuP. V. (1997). Training strategies for visual inspection. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 7(3), 171-196.
13.
GramopadhyeA. K.DruryC. G.SharitJ. (1997). Feedback strategies for visual search in airframe structural inspection. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 19, 333-344.
14.
Hummel-SchlugerA. O.BaerJ. S. (1996). A computer-controlled administration of the matching familiar figures test. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 28(1), 93-95.
15.
KaganJ.RosmanB. L.DayD.AlbertJ.PhillipsW. (1964). Information processing in the child: Significance of analytic and reflective attitudes. Psychological Monographs, 78, 1-37.
16.
KaufmanJ.GramopadhyeA. K.KimblerD. (2000). Using training to improve inspection quality. Quality Engineering, 12(4), 503-518.
17.
KoenigS.GramopadhyeA. K.MelloyB. J. (2002). Use of job aid to promote systematic search under different levels of task complexity. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 12(4), 349-363.
18.
MaJ.DruryC. G.BisantzA. M. (2002). Impact of feedback training in CBT in visual inspection. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting, Santa Monica, CA, 2079-2083.
19.
McDonaldT.GramopadhyeA. K. (1998). The effect of pacing and explicit costs on human decision making performance in inspection. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting, Santa Monica, CA, 2079-2083.
20.
NalanagulaD.GreensteinJ. S.GramopadhyeA. K. (2006). Evaluation of the effect of feedforward training displays of search strategy on visual search performance. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 36, 289-300.
21.
NicklesG. M.SacrezV.GramopadhyeA. K. (1998). Can we train humans to be systematic inspectors? In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting, Santa Monica, CA, 1165-1169.
22.
NicklesG. M.IIIMelloyB. J.GramopadhyeA. K. (2003). A comparison of three levels of training designed to promote systematic search behavior in visual inspection. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 32, 331-339.
23.
SadasivanS.GreensteinJ. S.GramopadhyeA. K.DuchowskiA. T. (2005). Use of eye movements as feedforward training for a synthetic aircraft inspection task, In Proceedings of the ACM CHI 2005 Conference, Portland, OR, 141-149.
24.
SalkindN. J.NelsonC. F. (1980). A note on the developmental nature of reflection-impulsivity. Developmental Psychology, 16, 237-238.
25.
SchwabishS. D.DruryC. G. (1984). The influence of the reflective-impulsive cognitive style on visual inspection. Human Factors, 26(6), 641-647.
26.
TettehE.JiangX.MountjoyD.SeongY.McBrideM. (2008). Evaluation of a job-aiding tool in inspection systems
