Lessons From a Comparison of Work Domain Models: Representational Choices and Their Implications

Author:

Burns Catherine M.1,Bisantz Ann M.2,Roth Emilie M.3

Affiliation:

1. University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada

2. University at Buffalo, The State University of New York, Buffalo, New York

3. Roth Cognitive Engineering, Brookline, Massachusetts

Abstract

As methods in cognitive work analysis become more widely applied, questions regarding the impact of modeling choices and similarities in modeling efforts across projects and domains are increasingly relevant. However, no explicit comparison of models of similar systems has been reported. This paper compares independently developed work domain analysis (WDA) models of two command and control environments. Similarities in model content and the types of nodes included provide evidence that WDA techniques can capture fundamental elements regarding purposes and constraints. These points of agreement provide a common starting point for developing work domain representations of military command and control systems. The comparison also revealed differences between the models. Although differences in content reflected differences in scope of coverage and level of detail, other differences corresponded to more fundamental choices in modeling approach. These included the treatment of sensors, level of integration in the model, and representation of particular abstract constraints. Examination of these more fundamental differences pointed to important degrees of freedom in how to represent a WDA and clarified the implications of these modeling choices for guiding design. Actual or potential applications of this research include aiding analysts in making work domain modeling choices as well as producing work domain models of command and control environments.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Behavioral Neuroscience,Applied Psychology,Human Factors and Ergonomics

Cited by 40 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3