Human performance frequently has been shown to be a substantial contributor to the overall reliability of complex dynamic systems. As a consequence, there has been a great emphasis in human factors to develop models of human cognition relevant to these situations as a tool to better predict human performance and to help in the design of improved person-machine systems. This paper describes the Cognitive Environment Simulation strategy towards human performance modeling and summarizes one comparison between system behavior and operator behavior in nuclear power emergency operations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmendolaA.BersiniU.CacciabueP.ManicniG.Modelling operators in accident conditions: Advances and perspectives on a cognitive model. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 27:599–612, 1987.
2.
CorkerK.DavisL.PapazianB.PewR.Development of an advanced task analysis methodology and demonstration for Army aircrew/aircraft integration. Technical Report BBN 6124, Bolt Beranek and Newman, Cambridge, MA, 1986.
3.
ElkindJ.CardS.HochbergJ.HueyB., (Eds.). Human Performance Models for Computer Aided Engineering.Academic Press, New York, 1990.
4.
PewR. W.MillerD. C.FeehrerC. E.Evaluation of Proposed Control Room Improvements Through Analysis of Critical Operator Decisions.Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, 1981. NP-1982.
5.
RasmussenJ.Information Processing and Human-Machine Interaction: An Approach to Cognitive Engineering.North-Holland, New York, 1986.
6.
RasmussenJ.DuncanK.LeplatJ.New Technology and Human Error.John Wiley & Sons, Chichester, 1987.
7.
ReasonJ.The Chernobyl errors. Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, June 1987.
8.
ReasonJ.Human Error.Cambridge University Press, England, in press.
9.
RothE. M.PopleH. E.Jr.WoodsD. D.Extending the Modeling Capabilities of the Cognitive Environment Simulation.U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington D. C., in press.
10.
WoodsD. D.Operator decision making behavior during the steam generator tube rupture at the Ginna nuclear power station. In BrownW.WyrickR., editors, Analysis of Steam Generator Tube Rupture Events at Oconee and Ginna.Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, 82–0301982. Also Westinghouse Research and Development Center Report 82-1C57-CONRM-R2.
11.
WoodsD. D.. Some results on operator performance in emergency events. In WhitfieldD., editor, Ergonomie Problems in Process Operations.Pergamon Press, Oxford, England, 1984. Inst. Chem. Eng. Symp. Ser. 90.
12.
WoodsD. D.. Modeling and predicting human error. In ElkindJ.CardS.HochbergJ.HueyB., editors, Human Performance Models for Computer Aided Engineering.Academic Press, New York, 1990.
13.
WoodsD. D.. Risk and human performance: Measuring the potential for disaster. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 29, in press.
14.
WoodsD. D.O'BrienJ.HanesL. F.Human factors challenges in process control: The case of nuclear power plants. In SalvendyG., editor, Handbook of Human Factors/Ergonomics, New York, 1987. Wiley.
15.
WoodsD. D.PopleH.Jr.RothE. M.The Cognitive Environment Simulation as a Tool for Modeling Human Performance and Reliability.U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington D. C., 1989. NUREG-CR-5213.
16.
WoodsD. D.RothE. M.PopleH.Cognitive Environment Simulation: An Artificial Intelligence System for Human Performance Assessment.U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington D. C., 1987. (NUREG-CR-4862).
17.
WoodsD. D.RothE. M.PopleH. E.Modeling human intention formation for human reliability assessment. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 22:169–200, 1988.
18.
WoodsD. D.WiseJ. A.HanesL. F.Evaluation of Safety Parameter Display Concepts.Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA, 1982. NP-2239.
