Subjects in Human Factors: Just who are They?

Abstract

Humans are the “raison d'etre” for human factors, yet what do we really know about the characteristics of those who serve as our subjects and on whom our science is built? What do we need to know? This article addresses issues related to subject selection and data reporting, provides some recommendations, and hopefully raises some questions.

Our subjects, as volunteers, differ from the population they are drawn from in many ways, specifically individuals volunteer as a function of the type of experiment. Volunteers have a greater sense of personal responsibility than non-volunteers. They tend to be higher in the need for social approval, and more social than non-volunteers. Volunteers for experiments involving risk taking score significantly higher in risk taking/arousal seeking, and are less anxious than non-volunteers. They are also less authoritarian and less conforming than non-volunteers. Finally, volunteers tend to be better educated than non-volunteers.

Articles, which reported findings on human subjects and were published in Human Factors (N=84) or Ergonomics (N=64) between August 1989 and April 1991, were reviewed. Forty percent of the Human Factor articles did not provide sufficient detail for the reader to determine if the subjects were fulfilling a course requirement, paid or unpaid. Our literature seems to be based on individuals between 18 and 30 years of age. In the issues of Human Factors, which were reviewed, among those articles reporting data derived from subjects, the gender of 42 percent of the subjects could not be determined from the article. In 27 percent of the human factor articles demographic data were not reported.

It is recommended that authors provide additional information on the characteristics of their subjects, so that researchers and practitioners alike can develop an informed opinion about the applicability/ limitations of the findings. As a minimum, details on age (mean, SD, median and range), gender, and specific demographics should be reported.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Boring

E. G.

(1950). A History of Experimental Psychology (2nd ed.). New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.

Collins

G. H. J.

(1962). Is annual influenza immunization worthwhile in industry? Journal of Occupational Medicine, 4, 529–531.

Cordes

E. R.

(1992, April). Bias in usability studies: Is this stuff science? Test & Evaluation Newsletter, 7(2), 4–7.

Gannon

Luchetta

Rhodes

Pardie

Segrist

(1992). Sex bias in psychological research. American Psychologist, 47(3), 389–396.

Geddie

C. J.

(1976). Profiling the Characteristics of the Developmental Test Participant (TM 31–76). Aberdeen: U.S. Army Human Engineering Laboratory.

Jobe

B. J.

Holgate

H. S.

Scrapansky

A. T.

(1983). Risk taking as motivation for volunteering for a hazardous experiment. Journal of Personality, 51(1), 95–107.

McNemar

(1946). Opinion attitude methodology. Psychological Bulletin, 43, 289–374.

Meister

(1976). Behavioral Foundations of System Development. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Meister

(1989). Conceptual Aspects of Human Factors. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

10.

Mebarki

Davies

B.T.

Anthropometry of Algerian women. (1990). Ergonomics, 33(12), 1537–1547.

11.

Miles

J. L. J.

Bolin

S. F.

(1991, Feb 25). But it was a golden crew? Proceedings for Test and Evaluation Symposium VII, American Defense Prepardness Association, 35–42.

12.

Orne

M. T.

(1969). Demand Characteristics and the Concept of Quasi-controls. In Rosenthal

Rosnow

R. L.

(Eds.), Artifact in Behavioral Research (pp. 143–179). New York: Academic Press.

13.

Parkes

K.R.

Styles

E.A.

Broadbent

D.E.

(1990) Work preferences as moderators of the effects of paced and unpaced work on mood and cognitive performance: A laboratory simulation of mechanized letter sorting. Human Factors, 32(2), 197–216.

14.

Parsons

H. M.

(1974). What happened at Hawthorne? Science, 183, 922–932.

15.

National Institute of Health/Alcohol Drug Abuse and Mental Health Administration. (1990, Aug 24). NIH/ADAMHA policy concerning inclusion of women in study populations. National Institute of Health Guide, 19(31), 18–19.

16.

Rosenthal

Rosnow

R. L.

(1975). The Volunteer Subject. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

17.

Rosethal

Rosnow

R. L.

(1991). Essentials of Behavioral Research: Methods and Data Analysis (2nd ed.). United States: McGraw- Hill.

18.

Rosenzweig

(1933). The experimental situation as a psychological problem. Psychological Review, 40, 337–354.

19.

Rosnow

L. R.

Rosenthal

(1976). The volunteer subject revisited. Australian Journal of Psychology, 28(2), 97–108.

20.

Silverman

(1977). Pergamon General Psychology Series. The Human Subject in the Psychology Laboratory (Vol. 68). Elmsford, N.Y.: Pergamon Press.

21.

Wagner

M. E.

Schubert

D. S. P.

(1976). Increasing volunteer representativeness by recruiting for credit or pay. The Journal of General Psychology, 94, 85–91.