Nadine Flegel
ABSTRACT
Control rooms are central to the well-being of many people. In terms of human computer interaction (HCI), they are characterized by complex IT infrastructures providing numerous graphical user interfaces. More modern approaches have been researched for decades. However, they are rarely used. What role does the attitude of operators towards novel solutions play? In one of the first quantitative cross-domain studies in safety-related HCI research (N = 155), we gained insight into affinity for technology interaction (ATI) and wish for pervasive computing solutions of operators in three domains (emergency response, public utilities, maritime traffic). Results show that ATI values were rather high, with broader range only in maritime traffic operators. Furthermore, the assessment of autonomy is more strongly related to the desire for novel solutions than perceived added safety value. These findings can provide guidance for the design of pervasive computing solutions, not only but especially for users in safety-critical contexts.
Supplemental Material
- Valentina Alberti and Giorgio Brajnik. 2018. Usability Recommendations for the SKA Control Room Obtained by a User-Centred Design Approach. In Proc. of International Conference on Accelerator and Large Experimental Control Systems (ICALEPCS’17), Barcelona, Spain, 8-13 October 2017(International Conference on Accelerator and Large Experimental Control Systems, 16). JACoW, Geneva, Switzerland, 1084–1090. https://doi.org/10.18429/JACoW-ICALEPCS2017-THAPL03Google Scholar
Cross Ref
- Patrick Baber, Marcel Saager, and Bertram Wortelen. 2020. Improving cooperation between spatially separated operators using augmented reality. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. Springer, Cham, 3–8.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Regina Bernhaupt, David Navarre, Philippe Palanque, and Marco Winckler. 2008. Model-based evaluation: A new way to support usability evaluation of multimodal interactive applications. In Maturing usability. Springer, London, 96–119.Google Scholar
- Kees Boersma. 2013. Liminal surveillance: an ethnographic control room study during A local event. Surveillance & Society 11, 1/2 (2013), 106.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Ronald Boring, Thomas Ulrich, and Torrey Mortenson. 2019. Level-of-Automation Considerations for Advanced Reactor Control Rooms. In Proceedings of the 11th Nuclear Plant Instrumentation, Control and Human-Machine Interface Technologies (NPIC&HMIT 2019). American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, 1210–1221.Google Scholar
- Ronald L. Boring, Jacques Hugo, Christian M. Richard, and Donald D. Dudenhoeffer. 2005. SIG: The Role of Human-Computer Interaction in next-Generation Control Rooms. In CHI ’05 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Portland, OR, USA) (CHI EA ’05). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 2033–2034. https://doi.org/10.1145/1056808.1057086Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kadir Cicek, Emre Akyuz, and Metin Celik. 2019. Future Skills Requirements Analysis in Maritime Industry. Procedia Computer Science 158 (2019), 270–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2019.09.051Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lucy A Cordiner, Sarah Nichols, and John R Wilson. 2000. Development of a Railway Ergonomics Control Room Assessment Package (Recap). In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. SAGE Publications Sage, Los Angeles, 507–510.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brit-Eli Danielsen, Margareta Lützhöft, Torgeir Kolstø Haavik, Stig Ole Johnsen, and Thomas Porathe. 2022. “Seafarers should be navigating by the stars”: barriers to usability in ship bridge design. Cognition, Technology & Work 24, 4 (2022), 675–691.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Sotiria Drivalou. 2005. Supporting Critical Operational Conditions in an Electricity Distribution Control Room through Ecological Interfaces. In Proceedings of the 2005 Annual Conference on European Association of Cognitive Ergonomics (Chania, Greece) (EACE ’05). University of Athens, Athens, 263–270.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Alexandra Fernandes, Rossella Bisio, and Claire Blackett. 2020. Operator Actions Outside the Control Room: A Field Study. In Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics. Cognition and Design, Don Harris and Wen-Chin Li (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 30–41.Google Scholar
- Nadine Flegel, Jonas Poehler, Kristof van Laerhoven, and Tilo Mentler. 2022. Towards Control Rooms as Human-Centered Pervasive Computing Environments. In Sense, Feel, Design, Carmelo Ardito, Rosa Lanzilotti, Alessio Malizia, Marta Larusdottir, Lucio Davide Spano, José Campos, Morten Hertzum, Tilo Mentler, José Abdelnour Nocera, Lara Piccolo, Stefan Sauer, and Gerrit van der Veer (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 329–344.Google Scholar
- Thomas Franke, Christiane Attig, and Daniel Wessel. 2019. A Personal Resource for Technology Interaction: Development and Validation of the Affinity for Technology Interaction (ATI) Scale. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 35, 6 (2019), 456–467. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1456150Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mehran Ghalenoei, Seyed Bagher Mortazavi, Adel Mazloumi, and Amir H. Pakpour. 2022. Impact of workload on cognitive performance of control room operators. Cognition, Technology & Work 24, 1 (2022), 195–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-021-00679-8Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tobias Grundgeiger, Joern Hurtienne, and Oliver Happel. 2021. Why and How to Approach User Experience in Safety-Critical Domains: The Example of Health Care. Human Factors 63, 5 (2021), 821–832. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819887575Google ScholarCross Ref
- Christian Heath and Paul Luff. 1991. Collaborative Activity and Technological Design: Task Coordination in London Underground Control Rooms. In Proceedings of the Second European Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work ECSCW ’91, Liam Bannon, Mike Robinson, and Kjeld Schmidt (Eds.). Springer Netherlands, Dordrecht, 65–80. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3506-1_5Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tomi Heimonen, Jaakko Hakulinen, Sumita Sharma, Markku Turunen, Lauri Lehtikunnas, and Hannu Paunonen. 2016. Multimodal Interaction in Process Control Rooms: Are We There Yet?. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM International Symposium on Pervasive Displays (Oulu, Finland) (PerDis ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1145/2914920.2915024Google ScholarDigital Library
- Erik Hollnagel and David D. Woods. 2006. Joint cognitive systems: Patterns in cognitive systems engineering. Taylor & Francis, Boca Raton, FL. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/subhh/detail.action?docID=263746Google Scholar
- Flávio EA Horita, João Porto de Albuquerque, and Victor Marchezini. 2018. Understanding the decision-making process in disaster risk monitoring and early-warning: A case study within a control room in Brazil. International journal of disaster risk reduction 28 (2018), 22–31.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jacques V. Hugo and Lorenzo Slay III. 2017. Human Factors and Modeling Methods in the Development of Control Room Modernization Concepts. Technical Report INL/CON-16-40364. Idaho National Lab. (INL), Idaho Falls, ID (United States). https://www.osti.gov/biblio/1364031Google Scholar
- Toni Ivergard and Brian Hunt. 2008. Handbook of control room design and ergonomics: a perspective for the future. CRC Press, Boca Raton.Google Scholar
- Christina Koffskey, Laura H Ikuma, Craig Harvey, and Fereydoun Aghazadeh. 2014. Using eye-tracking to investigate strategy and performance of expert and novice control room operators. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. SAGE Publications Sage, Los Angeles, 1667–1671.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hanna Maria Kaarina Koskinen, Jari Olavi Laarni, and Petri Mikael Honkamaa. 2008. Hands-on the Process Control: Users Preferences and Associations on Hand Movements. In CHI ’08 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Florence, Italy) (CHI EA ’08). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3063–3068. https://doi.org/10.1145/1358628.1358808Google ScholarDigital Library
- Casey Kovesdi, Zachary Spielman, Katya LeBlanc, and Brandon Rice. 2018. Application of eye tracking for measurement and evaluation in human factors studies in control room modernization. Nuclear Technology 202, 2-3 (2018), 220–229.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jari Laarni, Leena Norros, and Hanna Koskinen. 2007. Affordance Table - A Collaborative Smart Interface for Process Control. In Human-Computer Interaction. HCI Applications and Services, Julie A. Jacko (Ed.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 4553. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 611–619.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Olga Lezhnina and Gábor Kismihók. 2020. A multi-method psychometric assessment of the affinity for technology interaction (ATI) scale. Computers in Human Behavior Reports 1 (Jan. 2020), 100004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2020.100004Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lars Lischke, Sven Mayer, Andreas Preikschat, Markus Schweizer, Ba Vu, Paweł W. Woźniak, and Niels Henze. 2018. Understanding Large Display Environments: Contextual Inquiry in a Control Room. In Extended Abstracts of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (Montreal QC, Canada) (CHI EA ’18). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1145/3170427.3188621Google ScholarDigital Library
- Monica Lundh, Margareta Lützhöft, Leif Rydstedt, and Joakim Dahlman. 2011. Working conditions in the engine department–A qualitative study among engine room personnel on board Swedish merchant ships. Applied ergonomics 42, 2 (2011), 384–390.Google Scholar
- Margareta Lützhöft, Michelle R Grech, and Thomas Porathe. 2011. Information environment, fatigue, and culture in the maritime domain. Reviews of human factors and ergonomics 7, 1 (2011), 280–322.Google Scholar
- Margareta Lützhöft and Monica Lundh. 2008. Maritime application of control systems. In Handbook of Control Room Design and Ergonomics. CRC Press, Boca Raton, 245–280.Google Scholar
- Luana C. Main and Timothy P. Chambers. 2015. Factors affecting maritime pilots’ health and well-being: a systematic review. International Maritime Health 66, 4 (2015), 220 – 232. https://doi.org/10.5603/IMH.2015.0043Google ScholarCross Ref
- Yemao Man, Monica Lundh, and Scott N. MacKinnon. 2018. Managing unruly technologies in the engine control room: from problem patching to an architectural thinking and standardization. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs 17, 4 (oct 2018), 497–519. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-018-0159-yGoogle ScholarCross Ref
- Steffen Maurer, Rainer Erbach, Issam Kraiem, Susanne Kuhnert, Petra Grimm, and Enrico Rukzio. 2018. Designing a Guardian Angel: Giving an Automated Vehicle the Possibility to Override its Driver. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications. ACM, Toronto ON Canada, 341–350. https://doi.org/10.1145/3239060.3239078Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tilo Mentler, Nadine Flegel, Jonas Pöhler, and Kristof Van Laerhoven. 2022. Use Cases and Design of a Virtual Cross-Domain Control Room Simulator. In Mensch und Computer 2022 - Workshopband, Karola Marky, Uwe Grünefeld, and Thomas Kosch (Eds.). Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V., Bonn. https://doi.org/10.18420/muc2022-mci-ws10-291Google ScholarCross Ref
- Tilo Mentler, Philippe Palanque, Susanne Boll, Chris Johnson, and Kristof Van Laerhoven. 2021. Control Rooms in Safety Critical Contexts: Design, Engineering and Evaluation Issues. In Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2021, Carmelo Ardito, Rosa Lanzilotti, Alessio Malizia, Helen Petrie, Antonio Piccinno, Giuseppe Desolda, and Kori Inkpen (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 530–535.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Tilo Mentler, Philippe Palanque, Michael D. Harrison, Kristof van Laerhoven, and Paolo Masci. 2022. Control Rooms from a Human-Computer Interaction Perspective. In Sense, Feel, Design, Carmelo Ardito, Rosa Lanzilotti, Alessio Malizia, Marta Larusdottir, Lucio Davide Spano, José Campos, Morten Hertzum, Tilo Mentler, José Abdelnour Nocera, Lara Piccolo, Stefan Sauer, and Gerrit van der Veer (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 281–289.Google Scholar
- Tilo Mentler, Tim Rasim, Marcel Müßiggang, and Michael Herczeg. 2018. Ensuring usability of future smart energy control room systems. Energy Informatics 1, 1 (2018), 167–182.Google ScholarCross Ref
- István Mezgár and Sonja Grabner-Kräuter. 2012. Role of privacy and trust in mobile business social networks. In Handbook of Research on Business Social Networking: Organizational, Managerial, and Technological Dimensions. IGI Global, USA, 287–313.Google Scholar
- IC Millar. 1980. The need for a structured policy towards reducing human-factor errors in marine accidents. Maritime Policy and Management 7, 1 (1980), 9–15.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Jens Müller, Tobias Schwarz, Simon Butscher, and Harald Reiterer. 2014. Back to Tangibility: A Post-WIMP Perspective on Control Room Design. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Working Conference on Advanced Visual Interfaces (Como, Italy) (AVI ’14). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 57–64.Google ScholarDigital Library
- Jan Noyes and Matthew Bransby. 2001. People in control: human factors in control room design. Number 60 in IET Control Engineering Series. IET, Stevenage.Google Scholar
- Philippe Palanque, Andy Cockburn, Léopold Désert-Legendre, Carl Gutwin, and Yannick Deleris. 2019. Brace Touch: A Dependable, Turbulence-Tolerant, Multi-touch Interaction Technique for Interactive Cockpits. In Computer Safety, Reliability, and Security, Alexander Romanovsky, Elena Troubitsyna, and Friedemann Bitsch (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 53–68.Google Scholar
- Richard M. Ryan and Edward L. Deci. 2017. Self-Determination Theory. The Guilford Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Elaf Selim and Frank Maurer. 2010. EGrid: Supporting the Control Room Operation of a Utility Company with Multi-Touch Tables. In ACM International Conference on Interactive Tabletops and Surfaces (Saarbrücken, Germany) (ITS ’10). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 289–290. https://doi.org/10.1145/1936652.1936720Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. A. Stanton, C. Baber, G. H. Walker, R. J. Houghton, R. McMaster, R. Stewart, D. Harris, D. Jenkins, M. S. Young, and P. M. Salmon. 2008. Development of a Generic Activities Model of Command and Control. Cogn. Technol. Work 10, 3 (jun 2008), 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-007-0097-5Google ScholarDigital Library
- Neville A. Stanton, Aaron P. J. Roberts, Kiome A. Pope, and Daniel Fay. 2021. Returning to Periscope Depth in a Circular Control Room Configuration. Cogn. Technol. Work 23, 4 (nov 2021), 783–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-020-00654-9Google ScholarDigital Library
- Neville A Stanton, Paul Salmon, Daniel Jenkins, and Guy Walker. 2009. Human factors in the design and evaluation of central control room operations. CRC Press, Boca Raton.Google Scholar
- Sandra D Starke, Chris Baber, Neil J Cooke, and Andrew Howes. 2017. Workflows and individual differences during visually guided routine tasks in a road traffic management control room. Applied ergonomics 61 (2017), 79–89.Google Scholar
- Barbara G. Tabachnick and Linda S. Fidell. 2013. Using Multivariate Statistics (6 ed.). Pearson, Boston.Google Scholar
- Paweł W. Wozniak, Lars Lischke, Sven Mayer, Andreas Preikschat, Markus Schweizer, Ba Vu, Carlo von Molo, and Niels Henze. 2017. Understanding Work in Public Transport Management Control Rooms. In Companion of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing (Portland, Oregon, USA) (CSCW ’17 Companion). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 339–342. https://doi.org/10.1145/3022198.3026341Google ScholarDigital Library
- Seyyed Abolfazl Zakerian, Saeid Yazdanirad, Seifollah Gharib, Kamal Azam, and Asma Zare. 2018. The effect of increasing the illumination on operators’ visual performance in the control-room of a combined cycle power plant. Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine 30, 1 (2018), 56. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40557-018-0267-3Google ScholarCross Ref
Index Terms
- Autonomy and Safety: A Quantitative Study with Control Room Operators on Affinity for Technology Interaction and Wish for Pervasive Computing Solutions
Recommendations
Multimedia technology for pervasive computing environment
With the emerging multimedia techniques which can be used for various pervasive and ubiquitous applications such as healthcare, environmental monitoring, security and surveillance, there are a number of important challenges that arise when multimedia ...
Toward autonomic pervasive computing
iiWAS '08: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & ServicesThe Autonomic Pervasive Computing can simplify the complexity of the configuration, maintenance and management of pervasive environments such as smart spaces. The Pervasive Computing is a paradigm where the information processes are distributed in the ...
Towards ad hoc contextual services for pervasive computing
MW4SOC '06: Proceedings of the 1st workshop on Middleware for Service Oriented Computing (MW4SOC 2006)Context-awareness is a key challenge for pervasive computing, as it is a prime requirement towards delivering applications to users in a way that best matches user requirements, digital resources availability and physical conditions. However, enabling ...
Comments