Journal
THEORETICAL ISSUES IN ERGONOMICS SCIENCE
Volume 15, Issue 1, Pages 1-46Publisher
TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/1463922X.2013.802058
Keywords
reliability; validity; human agency; investigative syntaxes; measurement by fiat
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Evaluation of findings in ergonomics/human factors (E/HF) research suffers from misconceived assessments in terms of reliability and validity. Evaluation of E/HF studies published after 2000 confirms these observations. With an eye on these misconceived assessments, the present paper focuses on the consequences of various types of human involvement in (co-)shaping the phenomena to be evaluated. Issues addressed include the questionability of the inter-individual equivalence of findings, the defectiveness of the reliability coefficient as dispersion measure and the elusiveness of intended/presumed measurement as a validity criterion. These deficiencies are at odds with the zeal of E/HF authors to flag their findings as 'reliable' and 'valid'. In particular, positive evaluations of findings may show off as rhetoric. An evaluation procedure of consecutive constituents in a flowchart is proposed as an aid for appropriate evaluations. Various conditions are discussed that may encourage the adoption of correct procedures.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available