Problem Solving when Procedure Conditions Are Not Met

Abstract

Procedures and software for procedure execution are widely used in many work domains, and they support fluent performance in well-understood tasks. However, over-reliance on procedures can create challenges when the conditions assumed by procedures are not met. It is desirable for people to be able to use the same software to problem-solve when procedure conditions are not met as well as execute the procedures fluently when these conditions are met. We provide a detailed case study in a complex aerospace domain identifying strategies participants used to problem-solve when procedure conditions were not met. Our participants used software (called PRIDE) that was designed for fluent execution of electronic procedures, successfully for problem-solving as well. We develop strategy-level coding, and the construct of a planning set as part of strategy definition, used to code participant data. Further research will analyze and develop the resources needed to support problem solving as well as routine execution during operation.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Billman

Schreckenghost

Miri

(2014). Assessment of Alternative Interfaces for Manual Commanding of Spacecraft Systems: Compatibility with Flexible Allocation Policies. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 58(1), 365–369.

Burian

B. K.

(2006). Aeronautical Emergency and Abnormal Checklists: Expectations and Realities. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 50(1), 101–105. doi:10.1177/154193120605000122

Kortencamp

Bonasso

R. P.

Schreckengost

Dalal

Verma

Wang

(2008). A Procedure Representation Language for Human Spaceflight Operations. Presented at the 9th International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation in Space.

Mauro

Degani

Loukopoulos

Barshi

(2012). The Operational Context of Procedures and Checklists in Commercial Aviation. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 56(1), 758–762.

O’Hara

Roth

E. M.

(2006). Operational Concepts, Teamwork, and Technology in Commercial Nuclear Power Stations. In Bowers

Salas

Jentsch

(Eds.), Creating High-Tech Teams: Practical Guidance on Work Performance and Technology (pp. 135–159). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Schreckenghost

Milam

Billman

(2014). Human performance with procedure automation to manage spacecraft systems (pp. 1–16). IEEE.

Schreckengost

Bonasso

R. P.

Kortencamp

Bell

Milam

Thronesbery

(2008). Adjustable Autonomy with NASA Procedures. Presented at the The 9th International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation in Space, Pasadena,CA.

Vicente

K. J.

(1999). Cognitive work analysis : toward safe, productive, and healthy computer-based work. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.