Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of presentation of information for process control operations

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

Abstract

In an experimental process control simulation study two operators performed monitoring and control operations including safety critical tasks that required parallel processing of information distributed over different functional mimic displays. The assignment of mimic displays to Visual Display Units (VDUs) was experimentally varied by allowing one or two VDUs for mimic presentation. The study revealed no evidence for differences in task performance during normal process control operations. During abnormal operations, however, detrimental effects both on performance and work load were observed. Having only one VDU available for mimic display revealed either a lower level of performance (time for fault management) and/or a higher level of emotional work strain. It is concluded that decisions on the number of VDUs necessary for effective and efficient process control must refer to the tasks to be performed and the presentation of information necessary for a safe, effective and efficient task performance under critical, but not only normal conditions.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • CEN (European Committee for Standardization) (2000a) Ergonomic principles related to mental work-load—part 1: general terms and definitions (EN ISO 10075-1:2000). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels

  • CEN (European Committee for Standardization) (2000b) Ergonomic principles related to mental workload—part 2: design principles (EN ISO 10075-2:2000). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels

  • CEN (European Committee for Standardization) (2000c) Safety of machinery—ergonomic design principles—part 2: interactions between the design of machinery and work tasks (EN 614-2:2000). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels

  • CEN (European Committee for Standardization) (2004a) Ergonomics principles in the design of work systems (EN ISO 6385:2004). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels

  • CEN (European Committee for Standardization) (2004b) Ergonomic design of control centres—part 4: layout and dimensions of workstations (EN ISO 11064-4:2004). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels

  • CEN (European Committee for Standardization) (2006) Ergonomics of human–system interaction—part 110: dialogue principles (EN ISO 9241-110:2006). European Committee for Standardization, Brussels

  • HSF (Health and Safety Framework) Directive (1989) Council Directive 89/391/EEC of 12 June 1989 on the introduction of measures to encourage improvements in the safety and health of workers at work. Official Journal L-183-29/06/1989:0001-0008

  • Kramer AF (1993) Physiological metrics of mental workload: a review of recent progress. In: Ullsperger P (ed) Psychophysiology in mental workload. Haefner, Heidelberg, pp 2–34

    Google Scholar 

  • Manzey D (1998) Psychophysiologie mentaler Beanspruchung. In: Rösler F (ed) Ergebnisse und Anwendungen der Psychophysiologie (Enzyklopädie der Psychologie, C/I/7). Hogrefe, Göttingen, pp 799–864

  • Meshkati N (2003) Control rooms’ design in industrial facilities. Hum Factors Ergon Manuf 13:269–277. doi:10.1002/hfm.10043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moray N (1997) Human factors in process control. In: Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. Wiley, New York, pp 1944–1971

    Google Scholar 

  • Nachreiner F (1989) Ingenieurpsychologische Ansätze zur Erhöhung der Zuverlässigkeit in automatisierten Produktionssystemen. In: Ludborzs B (ed) Bericht über den 4. Workshop ‘Psychologie der Arbeitssicherheit’. Asanger, Heidelberg, pp 59–69

  • Nachreiner F (1998) Ergonomics and standardization. In: Stellmann J (ed) ILO encyclopaedia of occupational health and safety, vol 1. International Labour Office, Geneva, pp 29.11–29.14

  • Nachreiner F, Nickel P, Meyer I (2006) Human factors in process control systems: the design of human-machine interfaces. Safety Science 44:5–26. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2005.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickel P (2002) Psychische Beanspruchung und Herzfrequenzvariabilität. Sensitivität und Diagnostizität der 0,1 Hz-Komponente der Herzfrequenzvariabilität zur Erfassung psychischer Beanspruchung. Wirtschaftsverlag NW, Bremerhaven

  • Nickel P, Nachreiner F (2002) The suitability of the 0.1 Hz component of heart rate variability for the assessment of mental workload in real and simulated work situations. In: De Waard D, Brookhuis KA, Moraal J, Toffetti A (eds) Human factors in transportation, communication, health and the workplace. Shaker, Maastricht, pp 317–334

    Google Scholar 

  • Nickel P, Nachreiner F (2003) Sensitivity and diagnosticity of the 0.1 Hz component of heart rate variability as an indicator of mental workload. Hum Factors 45:575–590. doi:10.1518/hfes.45.4.575.27094

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nickel P, Nachreiner F (2004) Ergonomic requirements for job aids—work documents for operators in chemical process control systems. In: De Waard D, Brookhuis KA, Weikert CM (eds) Human factors in design. Shaker, Maastricht, pp 289–302

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidtke H (1966) Überwachungs-, Kontroll- und Steuerungstätigkeiten. Beuth, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheridan TB (2006) Supervisory control. In: Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. Wiley, Hoboken, pp 1025–1052

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • VDU (Visual Display Units) Directive (1990) Council Directive 90/270/EEC of 29 May 1990 on the minimum safety and health requirements for work with display screen equipment. Official Journal L-156-21/06/1990:0014-0018

  • Wickens CD, Carswell CM (1995) The proximity compatibility principle: its psychological foundation and its relevance to display design. Hum Factors 37:473–494

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wickens CD, Hollands JG (2000) Engineering psychology and human performance. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The process control system in the laboratories of the Work and Organisational Psychology Unit, Universität Oldenburg, Germany, was funded by a HBFG and the state of Lower Saxonia, Germany. We would like to thank the participants from the Work and Organisational Psychology Unit for their assistance in carrying out these studies.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, The University of Sheffield, Psychology Building, Western Bank, Sheffield, S10 2TP, UK

    Peter Nickel

  2. Abteilung Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie, Institut für Psychologie, Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg, 26111, Oldenburg, Germany

    Friedhelm Nachreiner

Authors
  1. Peter Nickel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Friedhelm Nachreiner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Nickel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nickel, P., Nachreiner, F. Evaluation of presentation of information for process control operations. Cogn Tech Work 10, 23–30 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-007-0074-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-007-0074-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation