Moray's Model Of Error
Contents |
board Indexes Data Science Research Pseudoscience Technology Tags (411 active topics) (182 articles published) Tools How to contribute Methods & Statistics Site history Recent changes Site Manager Error (Human Error) FoldUnfold Table of
Human Error Definition
Contents Definition Theoretical frame Theories of Error Freud Norman Rasmussen Reason Different types of human error Types of Slips & Mistakes Accident Causation Model Error Investigation Error Prediction Error Management Perspectives Cognitive Perspective Short-Term Memory Ergonomic human error in aviation Perspective Psychosocial Perspective Organisational Perspective Supporting evidence Refuting evidence See also Way forward (to do list) Knowledge Management Space Wiki of Science Team (contributors to this page) Authors / Editors Proof-readers Peer-revisions
Causes Of Human Error In The Workplace
& comments Definition The word error has different meanings and usages relative to how it is conceptually applied. Sanders and Moray (1991, p.25 [16]) define it as “something that has been done which was not intended by the actor, not desired by a set of rules or an external observer, or that led the task or system outside its acceptable limits”. Reason (1990, p.5 [15])
Rasmussen Model Of Human Behavior
sees an error as “a generic term to encompass all those occasions in which a planned sequence of mental or physical activities fails to achieve its intended outcome, and when these failures cannot be attributed to the intervention of some chance agency”. Woods, Johannesen, Cook and Sarter (1994, p.2 [18]) define error as “a specific variety of human performance that is so clearly and significantly substandard and flawed when viewed in retrospect that there is no doubt that should have been viewed by the practitioner as substandard at the time the act was committed or omitted”. Most agree on fundamental aspects of error, seeing it as the result of something that people do or intend to do that leads to outcomes were different from what they had expected. Therefore, to be consistent with these views on error, it would be defined as an action or decision that results in one or more unintended negative outcomes (Strauch, 2004, p.21 [17]). Theoretical frame Theories of Error Freud Freud and his students believe that error was a product of the unconscious drives of the person (Brenner, 1964 [5]). Those who erred were considered to b
4. *Moray, N.. 2000. Human Error. In Encyclopedia of Psychology. Washington, D.C., American Psychological Association.Article (PDF Available) · January 2004 with 13 Reads1st Neville Moray34.13 · University of SurreyDiscover the world's research11+ million members100+ million publications100k+ research projectsJoin for free Human Error 1 Running knowledge-based errors occur even though we execute well against our plans. head: HUMAN ERROR Human Error Neville Moray University of Surrey Human Error 2 Human
Rasmussen Srk Model
error only occurs when people perform actions contrary to their intention (Reason, 1990). Actions may be mental or physical, an incorrect mental srk thermodynamic model calculation or a wrong keystroke, a failure to remember something recently perceived or an incorrect movement when steering a carAn accident is not always an error, and the mere failure to reach a goal need not mean http://wikiofscience.wikidot.com/quasiscience:error that an error has occurred. . Only when behavior is related to context can error be recognised. Errors may have desirable outcomes (as when a wrong turn leads to an unexpected shortcut), and correct behavior undesirable outcomes (as when medicine is given to someone who is discovered to be allergic to it). The context in which behavior occurs, and the intention of the actor, not merely the behavior, define error. Some errors are inherent https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260337282_4_Moray_N_2000_Human_Error_In_Encyclopedia_of_Psychology_Washington_DC_American_Psychological_Association in a task and are not strictly human error: when people steer a car they must constantly correct error caused by environmental perturbations such as wind or a rough road, making new corrections if they overshoot or undershoot. Such skills are called “closed loop”, because the effects of actions return to the actors in a feedback loop, and there will almost always be error because of the delay between the moment when a person acts and the time when the results of that action can be seen and measured against the goal. Error here is a source of information for guiding behavior, and can be eliminated only in very special cases. Indeed error is positively advantageous when searching for ways to perform a new task, as is reflected in the phrase “trial and error” applied to problem solving. Creativity often requires such error, which is then virtuous rather than undesirable. Error is often studied in the context of accidents, particularly when “human error” is intended to explain what occurred. Among the many Human Error 3 taxonomies which have been proposed, the following are typical examples: performance measurement (Norman, 1981; Senders and Moray, 1991), human-machine system characteristics (Fleishman & Quaintance, 1984), safety and reliability (Rasmussen, 1986; Hollnagel, 1998), cognitive psychology (Norman, 1981; Reason, 1990), sociotechnical properties (Rasmussen, Pejtersen, & Goldste
the article in the profile.DoneDuplicate citationsThe following articles are merged in Scholar. Their combined http://scholar.google.com/citations?user=46MV-ukAAAAJ&hl=en citations are counted only for the first article.DoneMerge duplicatesCitations per yearScholarFollowEmailFollow new articlesFollow new citationsCreate alertCancelNeville MorayProfessor Emeritus of Applied Cognitive Psychology , University of Surrey, UKScience, philosophy, artNo verified emailScholarGet my own profileGoogle ScholarCitation indicesAllSince 2011Citations94912435h-index4222i10-index8640200820092010201120122013201420152016417375420345368462457444355Title1–20Cited byYearAttention in dichotic listening: human error Affective cues and the influence of instructionsN MorayQuarterly journal of experimental psychology 11 (1), 56-60, 195911541959Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systemsJ Lee, N MorayErgonomics 35 (10), 1243-1270, 19928181992Trust, self-confidence, and operators' adaptation to automationJD Lee, N MorayInternational of human error journal of human-computer studies 40 (1), 153-184, 19945981994Where is capacity limited? A survey and a modelN MorayActa psychologica 27, 84-92, 19675151967Trust in automation. Part II. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulationBM Muir, N MorayErgonomics 39 (3), 429-460, 19964971996Human error: Cause, prediction, and reductionJW Senders, NP MorayL. Erlbaum Associates, 19914531991Attention: Selective processes in vision and hearingN MorayHutchinson, 19693911969Monitoring behavior and supervisory control.N MorayJohn Wiley & Sons, 19863471986Adaptive automation, trust, and self-confidence in fault management of time-critical tasks.N Moray, T Inagaki, M ItohJournal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 6 (1), 44, 20002792000Mental workload: Its theory and measurementSpringer Science & Business Media, 20132362013Error reduction as a systems problemN MorayHuman error in medicine, 67-91, 19941881994Spectral analysis of sinus arrhythmia: A measu
be down. Please try the request again. Your cache administrator is webmaster. Generated Thu, 20 Oct 2016 19:46:25 GMT by s_wx1126 (squid/3.5.20)