The issues involved in using a pictorial versus a descriptive format to collect data on working posture are reviewed. The use of pictograms to represent limb displacement or joint angle is evaluated and shortcomings in terms of fidelity to the posture being assessed and the facility with which trends and summaries can be extracted are identified. The advantages of a format using only verbal descriptions are described in terms of the flexibility to mix behavioral and anatomical elements, the flexibility to adjust and label measurement intervals and categories, and a layout which facilitates the comparison and summary of data.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArmstrongT.J.FoulkeJ.A.JosephB.S.GoldsteinS.A. (1982). Investigation of cumulative trauma disorders in a poultry processing plant. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 43, 103–116.
2.
BhatnagerV.DruryC.G.SchiroS.G. (1985). Posture, postural discomfort, and performance. Human Factors. 27(2), 189–199.
3.
BrantonP.GraysonG. (1967). An evaluation of train seats by observation of sitting behaviour. Ergonomics. 10(1), 35–51.
4.
CorlettE.N.MadeleyS.J.ManenicaI. (1979). Posture targetting: A technique for recording working postures. Ergonomics, 22(3), 357–366.
5.
KarhuO.KansiP.KuorinkaI. (1977). Correcting working postures in industry: A practical method for analysis. Applied Ergonomic, 8, 19–201.
6.
SilvaU.A. (1986). Standardized postural identification in the elderly: the categorized posture method. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society. 30th Annual Meeting, Dayton, Ohio, 1149–1153. Santa Monica, CA: The Human Factors Society.
7.
PaneroJ.ZelnikM. (1979). Human Dimension and Interior Space, New York, NY: The Whitney Library of Design.
