Salmon Paul M, Walker Guy H, M Read Gemma J, Goode Natassia, Stanton Neville A
a Faculty of Arts and Business, Centre for Human Factors and Sociotechnical Systems , University of the Sunshine Coast , Maroochydore , Australia.
b Institute for Infrastructure and Environment , Heriot-Watt University , Edinburgh , UK.
Ergonomics. 2017 Feb;60(2):194-205. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2015.1103385. Epub 2016 Jan 22.
The issues being tackled within ergonomics problem spaces are shifting. Although existing paradigms appear relevant for modern day systems, it is worth questioning whether our methods are. This paper asks whether the complexities of systems thinking, a currently ubiquitous ergonomics paradigm, are outpacing the capabilities of our methodological toolkit. This is achieved through examining the contemporary ergonomics problem space and the extent to which ergonomics methods can meet the challenges posed. Specifically, five key areas within the ergonomics paradigm of systems thinking are focused on: normal performance as a cause of accidents, accident prediction, system migration, systems concepts and ergonomics in design. The methods available for pursuing each line of inquiry are discussed, along with their ability to respond to key requirements. In doing so, a series of new methodological requirements and capabilities are identified. It is argued that further methodological development is required to provide researchers and practitioners with appropriate tools to explore both contemporary and future problems. Practitioner Summary: Ergonomics methods are the cornerstone of our discipline. This paper examines whether our current methodological toolkit is fit for purpose given the changing nature of ergonomics problems. The findings provide key research and practice requirements for methodological development.
人机工程学问题空间所涉及的问题正在发生变化。尽管现有范式似乎适用于现代系统，但我们的方法是否适用却值得质疑。本文探讨了系统思维这一当前普遍存在的人机工程学范式的复杂性是否超出了我们方法工具包的能力。这是通过审视当代人机工程学问题空间以及人机工程学方法能够应对所提出挑战的程度来实现的。具体而言，聚焦于系统思维的人机工程学范式中的五个关键领域：作为事故原因的正常绩效、事故预测、系统迁移、系统概念以及设计中的人机工程学。讨论了用于进行每条探究路线的可用方法，以及它们满足关键要求的能力。在此过程中，确定了一系列新的方法要求和能力。有人认为，需要进一步进行方法开发，以便为研究人员和从业人员提供适当的工具，来探索当代和未来的问题。从业者总结：人机工程学方法是我们这门学科的基石。鉴于人机工程学问题性质的变化，本文探讨了我们当前的方法工具包是否适用。研究结果为方法开发提供了关键的研究和实践要求。
