Evaluation of Different Scales for Measurement of Perceived Physical Strain During Performance of Manual Tasks

• Autorzy: Hernandez L. , Alhemood A. , Genaidy A. M. , Karwowski W.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The main objective of this study was to evaluate different scales of perceived strain during the performance of various physical tasks. A total of 52 male and female participants took part in 4 experiments to achieve the study objective. The results suggest that a bipolar comfort-discomfort scale is a more appropriate instrument than a discomfort scale for assessing cumulative physical stresses at work, especially at the beginning of the shift. For assessing discomfort at the end of the work shift, a unipolar scale may also be used. On the basis of the obtained results, red, green, and yellow zones are suggested to establish priorities for work redesign efforts in ergonomic control programs.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

load handling; perception; psychophysics; practical methodologies

PL

psychologia pracy; mierzenie pracy i wysiłku; pozycja przy pracy; zmęczenie fizyczne; percepcja; prace ręczne

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2002
• Tom: Vol. 8, No. 4
• Strony: 413--432
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 11 poz., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Hernandez L.

• Industrial and Manufacturing Program, University of Cincinnati, OH, USA

autor

Alhemood A.

• Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research, Safat, Kuwait

autor

Genaidy A. M.

• Industrial and Manufacturing Program, University of Cincinnati, OH, USA

autor

Karwowski W.

• Center for Industrial Ergonomics, University of Louisville, KY, USA

Bibliografia

• 1.Borg, G.A.V. (1970). Perceived exertion as an indicator of somatic stress. Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 2, 92-98.
• 2.Borg, G.A.V. (1982). Psychophysical bases of perceived exertion. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 14, 377-381.
• 3.Corlett, E.N., & Bishop, R.F. (1976). A technique for assessing postural discomfort. Ergonomics, 19, 175-182.
• 4.Fleishman, E.A., Gebhardt, D.L., & Hogan, J.C. (1984). The measurement of effort. Ergonomics, 27, 947-954.
• 5.Helander, M., & Mukund, S. (1991). The use of scaling techniques for subjective evaluations. In M. Kumashiro & E.D. Megaw (Eds.), Towards human work. Solutions to problems in occupational health and safety (pp. 193-200). London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
• 6.Herzberg, F. (1987). One more time: How do you motivate employees? Harvard Business Review, September-October, 109-120.
• 7.Keppel, G. (1991). Design and analysis. A researcher’s handbook (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall.
• 8.Ljunggren, G. (1986). Observer ratings of perceived exertion in relation to self ratings and heart rate. Applied Ergonomics, 17, 117-125.
• 9.Saldana, N., Herrin, G.H., Armstrong, T.J., & Franzblau, A. (1994). A computerized method for assessment of musculoskeletal discomfort in the workplace: A tool for surveillance. Ergonomics, 37, 1097-1112.
• 10.Sinclair, M.A. (1990). Subjective assessment. In J.R. Wilson & E.N. Corlett (Eds.), Evaluation of human work: A practical ergonomics methodology (pp. 59-88). London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
• 11.Ulin, S.S., Ways, C.M., Armstrong, T.J., & Snook, S.H. (1990). Perceived exertion and discomfort versus work height with a pistol-shaped screwdriver. American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 51, 588-594.