Dekker Sidney W A, Nyce James M
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Division of Industrial Ergonomics, Linköping Institute of Technology, SE - 581 83 Linköping, Sweden.
Ergonomics. 2004 Dec;47(15):1624-39. doi: 10.1080/00140130412331290853.
Ergonomics design is about the creation of future work. So how can ergonomics research support and inform design if its findings are cast in a language oriented towards current work derived from field observations or laboratory settings? In this paper we assess instances of three different strands (experimental, ethnomethodological, and surveys) of ergonomics research on paper flight strips in air traffic control, for how they analytically confront future work and how they make the findings relevant or credible with respect to future work. How these justifications come about, or how valid (or well argued for) they are, is rarely considered in the ergonomics literature. All three strands appear to rely on rhetoric and argument as well as method and analysis, to justify findings in terms of their future applicability. Closing the gap between research results and future work is an important aim of the ergonomic enterprise. Better understanding of the processes necessary to bridge this gap may be critical for progress in ergonomics research and for the use of its findings in actual design processes.
人机工程学设计关乎未来工作的创造。那么，如果人机工程学研究的结果是用一种源自实地观察或实验室环境的、面向当前工作的语言来表述的，它又如何能够支持设计并为设计提供信息呢？在本文中，我们评估了人机工程学研究的三种不同方向（实验性、民族方法学和调查）在空管中的纸质飞行进程单方面的实例，看它们如何从分析角度面对未来工作，以及它们如何使研究结果在未来工作方面具有相关性或可信度。人机工程学文献中很少考虑这些理由是如何产生的，或者它们有多有效（或论证得有多充分）。这三个方向似乎都依赖于修辞和论证以及方法和分析，以便根据研究结果在未来的适用性来证明其合理性。弥合研究结果与未来工作之间的差距是人机工程学事业的一个重要目标。更好地理解弥合这一差距所需的过程，对于人机工程学研究的进展以及将其研究结果应用于实际设计过程可能至关重要。
