Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Dynamic reliability and human factors for safety assessment of technological systems: a modern science rooted in the origin of mankind

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Cognition, Technology & Work Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper discusses the needs and requirements for practical implementation of human–machine interaction paradigms in prospective and retrospective analyses for design and safety assessment. The original theories of Hollnagel can lead to a comprehensive and detailed analysis of the “joint-cognitive” system, enabling the identification of root causes of human inappropriate behaviour and the evaluation of potentially complex incidental scenarios. However, the rigorous application of such approaches is sometime too ambitious or simply not possible for the lack of data or for the intrinsic complexity of the modelling architecture. This paper presents two possible ways forward when an overall safety analysis has to be performed for the entire plant and control. On the other hand, when well-defined tasks and specific behaviours need to be studied, the methods proposed by Hollnagel are recognised as the most modern and accurate instruments available.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  • Acosta C, Siu N (1993) Dynamic event trees accident sequence analysis: application to steam generator tube rupture. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 41(2):135–154

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aitkenhead AM, Slack JM (eds) (1990) Issues in cognitive modelling. LEA, Open University Set Book, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Bagnara S, Di Martino C, Lisanti B, Mancini G, Rizzo A (1989) A human error taxonomy based on cognitive engineering and on social occupational psychology. EUR 12624 EN. CEC-JRC, Ispra

    Google Scholar 

  • Cacciabue PC (1994) Affidabilità dinamica e fattori umani in sistemi nucleari. PhD Thesis. Politecnico di Milano (in Italian)

  • Cacciabue PC (2004) Guide to applying human factors methods. Springer, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Cacciabue PC, Hollnagel E (1993) Human models in reliability and safety analysis of interactive systems. Proceedings of International ANS/ENS topical meeting on probabilistic safety assessment, PSA 93, Clearwater Beach, FL, Jan. 26–29, 1993. American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, Ill, pp. 25–31

  • Cacciabue PC, Hollnagel E (1995) Simulation of Cognition: Applications. In: Hoc JM, Cacciabue PC, Hollnagel E (eds) Expertise and technology: cognition and human-computer interaction. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, pp 55–73

    Google Scholar 

  • Carpignano A, Piccini M (1999) Cognitive theories and engineering approaches for safety assessment and design of automated systems: a case study of a power plant. Int J Cogn Technol Work (IJ-CTW) 1(1):47–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cojazzi G, Cacciabue PC, Parisi P (1993) DYLAM-3. A dynamic methodology for reliability analysis and consequences evaluation in industrial plants. EUR 15265 EN

  • Hakobyan A, Aldemir T, Denninga R, Dunaganb S, Kunsmanb D, Ruttc B, Catalyurek U (2008) Dynamic generation of accident progression event trees. Nucl Eng Des 238(12):3457–3467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E (1991a) Cognitive ergonomics and the reliability of cognition. Le Travail Humain 54(4):305–321

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E (1991b) The phenotype of erroneous actions: implications for HCI design. In: Alty JL, Weir GRS (eds) Human computer interaction and the complex systems. Academic Press, London, pp 73–121

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E (1993) Human reliability analysis: context and control. Academic Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E (1994) Simplification of complexity: the use of simulation to analyse the reliability of cognition. In: Aldemir T, Siu NO, Mosleh A, Cacciabue PC, Göktepe BG (eds) Reliability and safety assessment of dynamic process systems. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 166–178

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E (1998) Cognitive reliability and error analysis method. Elsevier, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E (2004) Barriers and accident prevention. Ashgate Publishing Limited, Aldershot

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E, Marsden P (1996) Further development of the phenotype-genotype classification scheme for the analysis of human erroneous actions. European commission, joint research centre report. EUR-16463 EN. EC Bruxelles

  • Hollnagel E, Woods DD (1983) Cognitive systems engineering: new wine in new bottles. Int J Man Mach Stud 18:583–606

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hollnagel E, Woods DD (2005) Joint cognitive systems: foundations of cognitive systems engineering. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hsueh KS, Mosleh A (1993) The development and application of the accident dynamic simulator for dynamic probabilistic risk assessment of nuclear power plant. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 52(3):297–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ICAO—International Civil Aviation Organisation (1987) Accident/incident reporting manual second edition—1987 DOC 9156-AN/900. International Civil Aviation Organisation, Montreal, Canada

  • ICAO (1997) Accident/incident reporting manual-ADREP 2000. ICAO, Montreal, Canada

  • ICAO (2006) http://www.icao.int/anb/aig/Taxonomy/R4LDICAO.pdf

  • Lyons M, Woloshynowych M, Adams S, Vincent C (2005) Error reduction in medicine. Final report to the Nuffield Trust UK

  • Macwan A, Mosleh A (1994) A methodology for modelling operators errors of commission in probabilistic risk assessment. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 45:139–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masson M, van Hijum M, Bernandersson M, Evans A (2009) The European helicopter safety team (EHEST): 2008–2009 Achievements. European Rotorcraft Forum (ERF), September 22–25, Hamburg, Germany

  • Maurino DE, Reason J, Johnston N, Lee RB (1995) Beyond aviation human factors. Avebury aviation. Aldershot, UK

  • Parry G (1994) Critique of current practice in the treatment of human interactions in probabilistic safety assessments. In: Aldemir T, Siu NO, Mosleh A, Cacciabue PC, Göktepe BG (eds) Reliability and safety assessment of dynamic process systems. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 156–165

    Google Scholar 

  • Rasmussen J (1986) Information processes and human-machine interaction. An approach to cognitive engineering. North Holland, Oxford

  • Rasmussen J, Pedersen OM, Carnino C, Griffon M, Mancini G, Cagnolet P (1981) Classification system for reporting events involving human malfunction (Risø-M-2240, EUR-7444EN). Risø National Laboratory, Roskilde

    Google Scholar 

  • Reason J (1987) Generic error modelling system (GEMS): a cognitive framework for locating common human error forms. In: Rasmussen J, Duncan K, Leplat J (eds) New technology and human error. Wiley, London, pp 63–83

    Google Scholar 

  • Reason J (1997) Managing the risks of organisational accidents. Ashgate, Aldershot

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouse WB, Rouse SH (1983) Analysis and classification of human error. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 13(4):539–549

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Salvendi G (ed) (1997) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Shappell SA, Wiegmann DA (2000) The human factors analysis and classification system–HFACS. FAA, DOT/FAA/AM-00/7

  • Sheridan TB (1999) Human supervisory control. In: Sage AP, Rouse WB (eds) Handbook of systems engineering and management. Wiley, New York, pp 591–628

    Google Scholar 

  • Siu N (1994) Dynamic approaches–issues and methods: an overview. In: Aldemir T, Siu NO, Mosleh A, Cacciabue PC, Göktepe BG (eds) Reliability and safety assessment of dynamic process systems. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 3–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Stanton NA, Salomon PM (2009) Human error taxonomies applied to driving: a generic driver error taxonomy and its applications for intelligent transport systems. Saf Sci 47:227–237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Swain AD, Guttmann HE (1983) Handbook on human reliability analysis with emphasis on nuclear power plant application. NUREG/CR-1278. SAND 80-0200 RX, AN. Final report

  • Wickens CD, Flach JM (1988) Information processing. In: Wiener EL, Nagel DC (eds) Human factors in aviation. Academic Press, San Diego, pp 111–155

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Politecnico Milano, Dip. di Ing. Aerospaziale, Campus Bovisa Sud, via La Masa 34, 20156, Milan, Italy

    P. Carlo Cacciabue

Authors
  1. P. Carlo Cacciabue
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to P. Carlo Cacciabue.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Cacciabue, P.C. Dynamic reliability and human factors for safety assessment of technological systems: a modern science rooted in the origin of mankind. Cogn Tech Work 12, 119–131 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-010-0145-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-010-0145-4

Keywords