4.2 Article

Human-error-based design of barriers and analysis of their uses

Journal

COGNITION TECHNOLOGY & WORK
Volume 12, Issue 2, Pages 133-142

Publisher

SPRINGER LONDON LTD
DOI: 10.1007/s10111-010-0146-3

Keywords

Barrier design; Barrier analysis; Barrier uses; Human-error-based design; Human error; Human error assessment

Funding

  1. International Campus on Safety and Intermodality in Transportation the European Community
  2. Delegation Regionale a la Recherche et a la Technologie
  3. Ministere de l'Enseignement Superieur et de la Recherche
  4. Region Nord Pas de Calais
  5. Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
  6. Scientific Research Group on Supervisory, Safety and Security of Complex Systems
  7. European Research Group on Human-Machine Systems in Transportation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The paper discusses on the concept of human errors when operators use barriers or when barriers have to be designed to decrease risks associated with human behaviours. It gives taxonomies of barriers and of their uses and develops the concept of the human-error-based design of barriers to control human errors. Human error assessment methods are then proposed regarding three dimensions: retrospective analysis methods, prospective analysis methods and on-line analysis methods. A new methodology including these dimensions is proposed to take into account several uses of barriers: normal uses, unintentional erroneous uses, intentional diverted uses and uses of new barriers. In order to achieve the identification of these barrier uses, this approach is based on the comparison between the prescriptive and predictive behaviours for a prospective analysis or between prescriptive and real behaviours for a retrospective analysis to define new barriers or to redesign the existing ones. A management of the learning process of such barrier uses is integrated in order to make this design or redesign processes possible.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available