Towards a pluralistic epistemology: understanding human-technology interactions in shipping from psychological, sociological and ecological perspectives

Man, Y.; Lundh, M.; MacKinnon, S. N.

doi:10.12716/1001.12.04.20

Artykuł - szczegóły

Tytuł artykułu

Towards a pluralistic epistemology: understanding human-technology interactions in shipping from psychological, sociological and ecological perspectives

Autorzy

Man Y. , Lundh M. , MacKinnon S. N.

Treść / Zawartość

Pełne teksty:

Pobierz

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.12716/1001.12.04.20

Warianty tytułu

Języki publikacji

Abstrakty

In the shipping domain, many innovative technical systems have been designed and developed in the past decades, aiming to enable the maritime users to achieve the goal of safety, efficiency and effectiveness. The introduction of advanced technologies into workplaces have also created unprecedented challenges. Human users frequently find themselves in a supporting role to serve technology, being responsible for automation issues and blamed for “human errors” that sometimes result in tragic results. These challenges are closely associated with the design and use of technologies. Human‐technology interactions has become an important multidisciplinary research topic for shipping. This article reviews theoretical concepts relative to the dimensions of psychology, sociology and ecology in Human Computer Interaction (HCI) in order to form a deeper understanding of human‐technology interactions. This paper also discusses the theoretical constructs’ practical relevance by showing how a few cases exemplifying ongoing development sectors in shipping, such as energy efficiency optimisation, supervisory control of autonomous unmanned ships, and eco‐systems in engine control rooms, are understood with these theoretical perspectives. By presenting multidisciplinary understandings of human‐technology interaction, this paper aims to derive knowledge pertinent to methodological approaches and philosophical stances of future maritime human factors and HCI research.

Słowa kluczowe

pluralistic epistemology epistemology human-technology interactions shipping psychological perspective sociological perspective ecological perspective Human Computer Interaction (HCI)

Wydawca

Faculty of Navigation, Gdynia Maritime University

Czasopismo

TransNav : International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation

Rocznik

2018

Tom

Vol. 12, no. 4

Strony

795--811

Opis fizyczny

Bibliogr. 238 poz., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Man Y.

Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden

autor

Lundh M.

Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden

autor

MacKinnon S. N.

Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg, Sweden

Bibliografia

acharya, Y., Employee engagement in the shipping industry: a study of engagement among Indian officers. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 2015. 14(2): p. 267-292. - doi:10.1007/s13437-014-0065-x
2. Stopford, M., Maritime Economics (3rd edition). 2009, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon United Kingdom: Routledge. - doi:10.4324/9780203891742
3. Allen, P., Perceptions of technology at sea amongst British seafaring officers. Ergonomics, 2009. 52(10): p. 1206-1214. - doi:10.1080/00140130902971924
4. Grech, M.R., Human factors in the maritime domain / Michelle Rita Grech, Tim John Horberry, Thomas Koester, ed. T. Horberry and T. Koester. 2008, Boca Raton, Fla: CRC Press.
5. Ljung, M. and M. Lützhöft, Functions, performances and perceptions of work on ships. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 2014. 13(2): p. 231-250. - doi:10.1007/s13437-014-0057-x
6. Gartner. Gartner IT Glossary - Digitalization. 2018 [cited 2018 June]; 21]. Available from: https://www.gartner.com/it-glossary/digitalization/.
7. Lukas, U.F.v., Virtual and augmented reality for the maritime sector – applications and requirements. IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 2010. 43(20): p. 196-200. - doi:10.3182/20100915-3-DE-3008.00045
8. Gentzsch, W., A. Purwanto, and M. Reyer. Cloud Computing for CFD based on Novel Software Containers. in 15th International Conference on Computer and IT Applications in the Maritime Industries - COMPIT '16. 2016. Lecce, Italy.
9. Koga, S., Major challenges and solutions for utilizing big data in the maritime industry. 2015, World Maritime University: Malmö, Sweden. p. 91.
10. Rødseth, Ø.J., L.P. Perera, and B. Mo. Big Data in Shipping - Challenges and Opportunities. in 15th International Conference on Computer and IT Applications in the Maritime Industries - COMPIT '16. 2016. Lecce, Italy: Technische Universtat Hamburg.
11. Park, K. Blockchain Is About to Revolutionize the Shipping Industry. 2018 [cited 2018 June 21st]; Available from: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-04-18/drowning-in-a-sea-of-paper-world-s-biggest-ships-seek-a-way-out.
12. IMO. E-Navigation. 2014 [cited 2017 March 6]; Available from: http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/safety/navigation/pages/enavigation.aspx.
13. RINA, Digitisation Industry Survey. 2018, Royal Institution of Naval Architects.
14. Rylander, R. and Y. Man, Autonomous safety on vessels - an international overview and trends within the transport sector. 2016, Lighthouse: Gothenburg, Sweden.
15. Man, Y., et al., Human factor issues during remote ship monitoring tasks: An ecological lesson for system design in a distributed context. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2018. 68: p. 231-244. - doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2018.08.005
16. Hummels, D., Transportation costs and international trade in the second era of globalization. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 2007. 21(3): p. 131-154. - doi:10.1257/jep.21.3.131
17. Aplin, J. Rolls-Royce launches project to design unmanned ships. 2015 [cited 2018 June 21st]; Available from: https://www.forumforthefuture.org/blog/rolls-royce-launches-project-design-unmanned-ships.
18. MarEx. China to Build Autonomous Ship Test-Bed. 2018 [cited 2018 June 21st]; Available from: https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/china-to-build-autonomous-ship-test-bed#gs.A2uESKE.
19. Hetherington, C., R. Flin, and K. Mearns, Safety in shipping: The human element. Journal of Safety Research, 2006. 37(4): p. 401-411. - doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2006.04.007
20. Landauer, T., The trouble with computers usefulness usability and productivity. 1995: MIT press.
21. Lützhöft, M., M. Lundh, and T. Porathe, Onboard ship management overview system-an information sharing system on board. Transactions of the Royal Institute of Naval Architects, 2013. 155: p. 11-14.
22. Lundh, M. and L.W. Rydstedt, A static organization in a dynamic context – A qualitative study of changes in working conditions for Swedish engine officers. Applied Ergonomics, 2016. 55: p. 1-7. - doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2016.01.006
23. Lützhöft, M. and S. Dekker, On Your Watch: Automation on the Bridge. The Journal of Navigation, 2002. 55(01): p. 83-96. - doi:10.1017/S0373463301001588
24. Oliveira, M., J. Costa, and H. Torvatn. Tomorrow's On-Board Learning System (TOOLS). in Learning and Collaboration Technologies: Third International Conference. 2016. Toronto, ON, Canada: Springer.
25. Lützhöft, M., “The technology is great when it works”: Maritime Technology and Human Integration on the Ship's Bridge, in Department of Management and Engineering, Industrial ergonomics. 2004, Linköping University, The Institute of Technology: Linköping University.
26. Lützhöft, M. and J. Nyce, Integration work on the ship's bridge. Journal of Maritime research, 2008. 5(2): p. 59-74.
27. Mallam, S.C. and M. Lundh, Ship Engine Control Room Design: Analysis of Current Human Factors & Ergonomics Regulations & Future Directions. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 2013. 57(1): p. 521-525. - doi:10.1177/1541931213571112
28. Wagner, E., M. Lundh, and P. Grundevik, Engine Control Rooms – Human Factors Field Studies. 2008, MSI Design, Chalmers University of Technology, SSPA: Gothenburg, Sweden.
29. Schröder-Hinrichs, J.-U., et al., Maritime human factors and IMO policy. Maritime Policy & Management, 2013. 40(3): p. 243-260. - doi:10.1080/03088839.2013.782974
30. House, C. and C. Place, Report on the investigation of the engine failure of Savannah Express and her subsequent contact with a linkspan at Southampton Docks. 2006, Marine Accident Investigation Branch: Southampton, United Kingdom.
31. Rothblum, A.M. Human Error and Marine Safety. 2000 [cited 2018 March 10]; Available from: http://bowles-langley.com/wp-content/files_mf/humanerrorandmarinesafety26.pdf.
32. Sandhåland, H., H. Oltedal, and J. Eid, Situation awareness in bridge operations – A study of collisions between attendant vessels and offshore facilities in the North Sea. Safety Science, 2015. 79: p. 277-285. - doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2015.06.021
33. Grech, M.R., T. Horberry, and A. Smith, Human Error in Maritime Operations: Analyses of Accident Reports Using the Leximancer Tool. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 2002. 46(19): p. 1718-1721. - doi:10.1177/154193120204601906
34. MAIB, Report on the investigation of the grounding of Muros. 2016, Marine Accident Investigation Branch in UK: Southampton.
35. Grech, M.R. and N. Lemon, Human Centred Design for Enhanced Navigation Systems: Shifting the Focus on User Needs, in PACIFIC 2015 - 9th International Maritime Exposition & Conference. 2015: Sydney, Australia.
36. Ahvenjärvi, S., Management of The Safety of Automation Challenges The Training of Ship Officers, in Green ships, eco shipping, clean seas: the 12th Annual General Assembly of the International Association of Maritime Universities. 2011: Gdynia.
37. Card, S.K., A. Newell, and T.P. Moran, The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. 1983: L. Erlbaum Associates Inc. 469.
38. Lim, K.Y. and J.B. Long, The MUSE method of usability engineering. 1994, Cambridge: University Press. - doi:10.1017/CBO9780511624230
39. Norman, D.A. and S.W. Draper, User Centered System Design; New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction. 1986: L. Erlbaum Associates Inc. 526.
40. Carroll, J.M., Human–computer interaction: psychology as a science of design. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 1997. 46(501-522). - doi:10.1006/ijhc.1996.0101
41. Dix, A., et al., Human-Computer Interaction (3rd Edition). 2003: Prentice-Hall, Inc.
42. Sheridan, T.B. and R. Parasuraman, Human-Automation Interaction. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 2005. 1(1): p. 89-129. - doi:10.1518/155723405783703082
43. Hancock, P.A., et al., Human-Automation Interaction Research: Past, Present, and Future. Ergonomics in Design: The Quarterly of Human Factors Applications, 2013. 21(2): p. 9-14. - doi:10.1177/1064804613477099
44. Endsley, M.R., From Here to Autonomy: Lessons Learned From Human–Automation Research. Human Factors, 2016. 59(1): p. 5-27. - doi:10.1177/0018720816681350
45. Kaber, D.B., Issues in Human-Automation Interaction Modeling: Presumptive Aspects of Frameworks of Types and Levels of Automation. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2017: p. 1555343417737203.
46. Kosuge, K. and Y. Hirata. Human-Robot Interaction. in 2004 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics. 2004. - doi:10.1109/ROBIO.2004.1521743
47. Burke, J.L., et al., Final report for the DARPA/NSF interdisciplinary study on human-robot interaction. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews), 2004. 34(2): p. 103-112. - doi:10.1109/TSMCC.2004.826287
48. Sheridan, T.B., Human–Robot Interaction: Status and Challenges. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 2016.
49. Lazar, J., J. Feng, and H. Hochheiser, Research Methods in Human-Computer Interaction, 2nd edition. 2017, MA, USA.: Morgan Kaufmann.
50. AAWA, Remote and autonomous ships - the next steps. 2016, Rolls-Royce plc: London.
51. Wolff, C., Psychologia Empirica Methodo Scientifica Pertractata (1732). 2010: Kessinger Publishing.
52. Wickens, C.D., Engineering psychology and human performance. 1992: HarperCollins Publishers.
53. ASANET. An Introduction to Sociology: The Field of Sociology. 2008 [cited 2018 May 2]; Available from: http://www.asanet.org/sites/default/files/savvy/introtosociology/Documents/Field%20of%20sociology033108.htm#whatissociology.
54. Kaptelinin, V. and B.A. Nardi, Acting with Technology: Activity Theory and Interaction Design. 2006, Cambridge: MIT Press.
55. Suchman, L.A., Human-Machine Reconfigurations: Plans and Situated Actions (2nd Edition). 2007, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.
56. Lave, J., Cognition in practice: Mind, mathematics and culture in everyday life. 1988, New York, US: Cambridge University Press. - doi:10.1017/CBO9780511609268
57. Hutchins, E., Cognition in the wild. 1995, Cambridge: MIT Press.
58. Gibson, J.J., The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception: Classic Edition. 1979: Psychology Press.
59. Rasmussen, J., A.M. Pejtersen, and L.P. Goodstein, Cognitive systems engineering. 1994: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 378.
60. Bennett, K.B. and J.M. Flach, Display and Interface Design: Subtle Science, Exact Art. 2011: CRC Press, Inc. 510.
61. Johannsen, G., Human-machine interaction., in Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems (EOLSS): Control Systems, Robotics, and Automation. 2007, EOLSS Publishers: Paris, France.
62. Flach, J.M., Situation Awareness: Context Matters! A Commentary on Endsley. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2015. 9(1): p. 59-72. - doi:10.1177/1555343414561087
63. Proctor, R.W. and K.-P.L. Vu, Human information processing: an overview for human-computer interaction, in The human-computer interaction handbook, A.J. Julie and S. Andrew, Editors. 2003, L. Erlbaum Associates Inc. p. 35-51.
64. Broadbent, D.E., Perception and communication. 1958, Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press. - doi:10.1037/10037-000
65. Neisser, U., Cognition and Reality: Principles and Implications of Cognitive Psychology. 1976, San Francisco: Freeman.
66. Kahneman, D., Attention and effort. 1973, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
67. Posner, M.I., Orienting of attention. The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology, 1980. 32(1): p. 3-25. - doi:10.1080/00335558008248231
68. Eriksen, C.W. and J.D. St. James, Visual attention within and around the field of focal attention: A zoom lens model. Perception & Psychophysics, 1986. 40(4): p. 225-240. - doi:10.3758/BF03211502
69. Craik, K., The Nature of Explanation. 1943, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
70. Johnson-Laird, P.N., Mental models: towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. 1983: Harvard University Press. 513.
71. Baddeley, A., Working Memory. 1986, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
72. Reid, G.B. and T.E. Nygren, The Subjective Workload Assessment Technique: A Scaling Procedure for Measuring Mental Workload, in Advances in Psychology, A.H. Peter and M. Najmedin, Editors. 1988, North-Holland. p. 185-218.
73. Parasuraman, R. and P.A. Hancock, Adaptive control of workload. Stress, workload and fatigue, ed. P.A. Hancock and P.E. Desmond. 2001, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
74. Endsley, M.R., Measurement of Situation Awareness in Dynamic-Systems. Human Factors, 1995. 37(1): p. 65-84. - doi:10.1518/001872095779049499
75. Endsley, M.R., Toward a Theory of Situation Awareness in Dynamic-Systems. Human Factors, 1995. 37(1): p. 32-64. - doi:10.1518/001872095779049543
76. Norman, D.A., Cognitive Engineering, in User centered systems design, D.A.N.a.S.W. Draper, Editor. 1983, Erlbaum: Hillsdale, NJ. p. 31-62.
77. Faulkner, X., Usability Engineering. 2000, London: Macmillan Press LTD.
78. Dumas, J.S. and M.C. Salzman, Usability Assessment Methods. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 2006. 2(1): p. 109-140. - doi:10.1177/1557234X0600200105
79. Hollingsed, T. and D.G. Novick, Usability Inspection Methods after 15 Years of Research and Practice. Sigdoc'07: Proceedings of the 25th Acm International Conference on Design of Communication, 2007: p. 249-255.
80. Norman, D.A., Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded. 2013, London: MIT Press.
81. Eriksen, C.W. and T.D. Murphy, Movement of attentional focus across the visual field: A critical look at the evidence. Perception & Psychophysics, 1987. 42(3): p. 299-305. - doi:10.3758/BF03203082
82. Duncan, J., The locus of interference in the perception of simultaneous stimuli. Psychological review, 1980. 87: p. 273-300. - doi:10.1037/0033-295X.87.3.272
83. Treisman, A.M., Preattentive processing in vision. Computer Vision, Graphics and Image Processing, 1985. 31(2): p. 156-177. - doi:10.1016/S0734-189X(85)80004-9
84. Treisman, A.M. and G. Gelade, A feature-integration theory of attention. Cognitive Psychology, 1980. 12(1): p. 97-136. - doi:10.1016/0010-0285(80)90005-5
85. Carrasco, M., Visual attention: The past 25 years. Vision Research, 2011. 51(13): p. 1484-1525. - doi:10.1016/j.visres.2011.04.012
86. Findlay, J.M. and I.D. Gilchrist, Active Vision: The Psychology of Looking and Seeing. 2003, UK: Oxford University Press. - doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198524793.001.0001
87. Tsotsos, J.K., L. Itti, and G. Rees, A brief and selective history of attention, in Neurobiology of Attention, L. Itti, G. Rees, and J.K. Tsotsos, Editors. 2005, Academic Press. - doi:10.1016/B978-012375731-9/50003-3
88. Wickens, C.D., Situation Awareness: Review of Mica Endsley's 1995 Articles on Situation Awareness Theory and Measurement. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 2008. 50(3): p. 397-403. - doi:10.1518/001872008X288420
89. Salmon, P.M., et al., What really is going on? Review of situation awareness models for individuals and teams. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2008. 9(4): p. 297-323. - doi:10.1080/14639220701561775
90. Riley, J.M., et al., Performance and Situation Awareness Effects in Collaborative Robot Control with Automation. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 2008. 52(4): p. 242-246. - doi:10.1177/154193120805200410
91. Durso, F.T. and A. Sethumadhavan, Situation awareness: understanding dynamic environments. Hum Factors, 2008. 50(3): p. 442-8. - doi:10.1518/001872008X288448
92. Stanton, N.A., P.M. Salmon, and G.H. Walker, Let the Reader Decide: A Paradigm Shift for Situation Awareness in Sociotechnical Systems. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2015. 9(1): p. 44-50. - doi:10.1177/1555343414552297
93. Chiappe, D., T.Z. Strybel, and K.-P.L. Vu, A Situated Approach to the Understanding of Dynamic Situations. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2015. 9(1): p. 33-43. - doi:10.1177/1555343414559053
94. Lundberg, J., Situation awareness systems, states and processes: a holistic framework. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2015. 16(5): p. 447-473. - doi:10.1080/1463922X.2015.1008601
95. Samantha, V.-K., J.L. Steven, and Y. Hyo-Sang, Coincidence Between the Scientific and Folk Uses of the Term “Situation(al) Awareness” in Aviation Incident Reports. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2011. 5(4): p. 378-400. - doi:10.1177/1555343411424694
96. Selcon, S.J., R.M. Taylor, and E. Koritsas. Workload or situational awareness?. TLX vs. SART for aerospace systems design evaluation. 1991.
97. Marr, D., Vision: A Computational Investigation into the Human Representation and Processing of Visual Information. 1982, San Francisco: Freeman.
98. Endsley, M.R., Theoretical underpinnings of situation awareness: A critical review. Situation awareness analysis and measurement, 2000: p. 3-32.
99. Adams, M.J., Y.J. Tenney, and R.W. Pew, Situation Awareness and the Cognitive Management of Complex Systems. Human Factors, 1995. 37(1): p. 85-104. - doi:10.1518/001872095779049462
100. Smith, K. and P.A. Hancock, Situation Awareness Is Adaptive, Externally Directed Consciousness. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1995. 37(1): p. 137-148. - doi:10.1518/001872095779049444
101. Stanton, N.A., et al., Human Factors Methods: A Practical Guide for Engineering And Design. 2006: Ashgate Publishing Company.
102. Stanton, N.A., et al., Is situation awareness all in the mind? Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2009. 11(1-2): p. 29-40. - doi:10.1080/14639220903009938
103. Stanton, N.A., et al., Distributed situation awareness in dynamic systems: theoretical development and application of an ergonomics methodology. Ergonomics, 2006. 49(12-13): p. 1288-1311. - doi:10.1080/00140130600612762
104. Endsley, M.R., Designing for Situation Awareness: An Approach to User-Centered Design, Second Edition. 2011: CRC Press, Inc. 396. - doi:10.1201/b11371
105. Simon, H.A., Models of Man. 1957, New York: John Wiley and Sons.
106. Supe, S.V., Factors related to different degree of rationality in decision-making among farmers. 1969, Indian Agricultural Research Institute: New Delhi.
107. Polič, M., Decision making: between rationality and reality. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems, 2009. 7(2): p. 78-89.
108. Kørnøv, L. and W.A.H. Thissen, Rationality in decision- and policymaking: implications for strategic environmental assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal, 2000. 18(3): p. 191-200. - doi:10.3152/147154600781767402
109. Kahneman, D. and A. Tversky, Choices, values, and frames. 2000, New York: Cambridge University Press.
110. Klein, G., A recognition-primed decision (RPD) model of rapid decision making. 1993: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
111. Klein, G., The recognition-primed decision (RPD) model: Looking back, looking forward. Naturalistic decision making, 1997: p. 285-292.
112. Flach, J.M., et al., Decisionmaking in practice: The dynamics of muddling through. Applied Ergonomics, 2017. 63: p. 133-141. - doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2017.03.017
113. Piaget, J. and B. Inhelder, The Psychology of the Child. 1969, New York: Basic Books.
114. Reason, J., Human Error. 1990, UK: Cambridge University Press. - doi:10.1017/CBO9781139062367
115. Reason, J., Human error: models and management. BMJ : British Medical Journal, 2000. 320(7237): p. 768-770. - doi:10.1136/bmj.320.7237.768
116. Le Coze, J.-C., New models for new times. An anti-dualist move. Safety Science, 2013. 59: p. 200-218. - doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2013.05.010
117. Dekker, S., Ten Questions About Human Error. 2004, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
118. Vygotsky, L., Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. 1978, Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
119. Leont'ev, A.N., Activity Consciousness and Peronality. 1978, Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
120. Bødker, S., Activity Theory as a Challenge to Systems Design. 1990, 1990(334).
121. Leont'ev, A.N., Problems of the development of the mind. 1981, Moscow: Progress.
122. Engeström, Y., Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. 1987, Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy.
123. Bødker, S., Through the Interface: A Human Activity Approach To User Interface Design. 1991, Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum.
124. Nardi, B.A., Studying context: a comparison of activity theory, situated action models, and distributed cognition, in Context and consciousness, A.N. Bonnie, Editor. 1995, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. p. 69-102. - doi:10.7551/mitpress/2137.003.0008
125. Kuutti, K., Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research, in Context and consciousness, A.N. Bonnie, Editor. 1995, Massachusetts Institute of Technology. p. 17-44.
126. Kaptelinin, V. and B. Nardi, Activity Theory in HCI: Fundamentals and Reflections. 2012: Morgan & Claypool Publishers. 106.
127. Pirsig, R.M., Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance. 1974, NY, USA: William Morrow and Company.
128. Flach, J.M. and F. Voorhorst, What Matters: Putting Common Sense to Work. 2016, Dayton, USA: Wright State University Libraries.
129. Lave, J. and E. Wenger, Situated Learning - Legitimate peripheral participation. 1991, Cambrige, UK: Cambridge University Press. - doi:10.1017/CBO9780511815355
130. Hollan, J., E. Hutchins, and D. Kirsh, Distributed cognition: toward a new foundation for human-computer interaction research. ACM Trans. Comput.-Hum. Interact., 2000. 7(2): p. 174-196. - doi:10.1145/353485.353487
131. Leidner, D.E. and S.L. Jarvenpaa, The use of information technology to enhance management school education: a theoretical view. MIS Q., 1995. 19(3): p. 265-291. - doi:10.2307/249596
132. Lundin, J., Talking about work. Designing information technology for learning in interaction, in Department of Informatics. 2005, University of Gothenburg: Gothenburg Sweden.
133. Orr, J.E., Talking About Machines: An Ethnography of A Modern Job. 1996, U.S.: Cornell University Press.
134. Wenger, E., Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. 1998: Cambridge university press. - doi:10.1017/CBO9780511803932
135. Wenger, E., R.A. McDermott, and W. Snyder, Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge. 2002: Harvard Business Press.
136. Flach, J.M. and R.R. Hoffman, The Limitations of Limitations. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 2003. 18(1): p. 94-96, c3.
137. Brunswik, E., The conceptual framework of psychology, in International Encyclopedia of Unified Science. 1952, The University of Chicago Press: Chicago.
138. Taylor, F., Psychology and the design of machines. American Psychologist, 1957. 12(5): p. 249-258. - doi:10.1037/h0042194
139. Flach, J.M., Situation Awareness: Proceed with Caution. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1995. 37(1): p. 149-157. - doi:10.1518/001872095779049480
140. Heft, H., The Relevance of Gibson’s Ecological Approach to Perception for Environment-Behavior Studies, in Toward the Integration of Theory, Methods, Research, and Utilization, G.T. Moore and R.W. Marans, Editors. 1997, Springer US: Boston, MA. p. 71-108. - doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-4425-5_3
141. Rasmussen, J. and K.J. Vicente, Coping with human errors through system design: implications for ecological interface design. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 1989. 31(5): p. 517-534. - doi:10.1016/0020-7373(89)90014-X
142. Rasmussen, J., Information Processing and Human-Machine Interaction: An Approach to Cognitive Engineering. 1986: Elsevier Science Inc. 228.
143. Vicente, K.J. and J. Rasmussen, Ecological interface design: theoretical foundations. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, IEEE Transactions on, 1992. 22(4): p. 589-606. - doi:10.1109/21.156574
144. Smith, G.F., Representational effects on the solving of an unstructured decision problem. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1989. 19(5): p. 1083-1090. - doi:10.1109/21.44024
145. Flach, J.M., et al., Interface Design: A Control Theoretic Context for a Triadic Meaning Processing Approach, in The Cambridge Handbook of Applied Perceptual Research, H. Robert, et al., Editors. 2015, Cambridge University Press.
146. Bennett, K.B., Ecological interface design and system safety: One facet of Rasmussen's legacy. Applied Ergonomics, 2017. 59, Part B: p. 625-636.
147. Flach, J.M., The Ecology of Human-Machine Systems: A Personal History, in Global Perspectives on the Ecology of Human-Machine Systems, J.M. Flach, et al., Editors. 1995, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Hove, UK. p. 1-13.
148. Jenkins, D.P., et al., Cognitive Work Analysis: Coping with Complexity. 2008: Ashgate.
149. Jenkins, D.P.D., G.H.D. Walker, and N.A.P. Stanton, Cognitive Work Analysis. 2012, Abingdon, GB: Ashgate.
150. Read, G.J.M., et al., Designing a ticket to ride with the Cognitive Work Analysis Design Toolkit. Ergonomics, 2015: p. 1-21. - doi:10.1080/00140139.2015.1013576
151. Naikar, N., Cognitive work analysis: An influential legacy extending beyond human factors and engineering. Applied Ergonomics, 2017. 59, Part B: p. 528-540.
152. Hilliard, A. and G.A. Jamieson, Representing energy efficiency diagnosis strategies in cognitive work analysis. Applied Ergonomics, 2017. 59, Part B: p. 602-611.
153. Stanton, N.A., et al., Cognitive Work Analysis: Applications, Extensions and Future Directions. 2017: Taylor & Francis Group. - doi:10.1201/9781315572536
154. Vicente, K.J., Cognitive work analysis: Toward safe, productive, and healthy computer-based work. 1999, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
155. Hollnagel, E., The Diminishing Relevance of Human-Machine Interaction, in The Handbook of Human-Machine Interaction: A Human-Centered Approach, G.A. Boy, Editor. 2011, Ashgate Publishing Limited: England. p. 417-429.
156. Hobbs, A., et al., Three principles of human-system integration, in Proceedings of the 8th Australian Aviation Psychology Symposium. 2008: Sydney, Australia.
157. Behymer, K.J. and J.M. Flach, From Autonomous Systems to Sociotechnical Systems: Designing Effective Collaborations. She Ji: The Journal of Design, Economics, and Innovation, 2016. 2(2): p. 105-114. - doi:10.1016/j.sheji.2016.09.001
158. Dekker, S., Drift into Failure: From Hunting Broken Components to Understanding Complex Systems. 2011, Farnham: AshgatePublishing Co.
159. Sheridan, T.B., Humans and Automation: System Design and Research Issues. 2002, New York: John Wiley. 280.
160. Sheridan, T.B., Telerobotics, automation and human supervisory control. 1992, Cambridge: MIT Press.
161. Bainbridge, L., Ironies of automation. Automatica, 1983. 19(6): p. 775-779. - doi:10.1016/0005-1098(83)90046-8
162. Woods, D.D., Decomposing Automation: Apparent Simplicity, Real Complexity. Automation and Human Performance: Theory and Applications, ed. R. Parasuraman and M. Mouloua. 1996: Erlbaum.
163. Norman, D.A., The problem of automation: Inappropriate feedback and interaction, not over-automation, in Human factors in hazardous situations, D.E. Broadbent, A. Baddeley, and J.T. Reason, Editors. 1990, Oxford University Press. p. 585-593. - doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198521914.003.0014
164. Parasuraman, R. and D.H. Manzey, Complacency and bias in human use of automation: an attentional integration. Hum Factors, 2010. 52(3): p. 381-410. - doi:10.1177/0018720810376055
165. Parasuraman, R. and V. Riley, Humans and Automation: Use, Misuse, Disuse, Abuse. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1997. 39(2): p. 230-253. - doi:10.1518/001872097778543886
166. Sauer, J., A. Chavaillaz, and D. Wastell, Experience of automation failures in training: effects on trust, automation bias, complacency, and performance. Ergonomics, 2015: p. 1-28.
167. Chavaillaz, A., D. Wastell, and J. Sauer, System reliability, performance and trust in adaptable automation. Applied Ergonomics, 2016. 52: p. 333-342. - doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2015.07.012
168. Mosier, K.L., et al., Aircrews and Automation Bias: The Advantages of Teamwork? The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 2001. 11(1): p. 1-14. - doi:10.1207/S15327108IJAP1101_1
169. Skitka, L., K.L. Mosier, and M. Burdick, Accountability and automation bias. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 2000. 52(4): p. 701-717. - doi:10.1006/ijhc.1999.0349
170. Skitka, L., K.L. Mosier, and M. Burdick, Does automation bias decision-making? International Journal of Human Computer Studies, 1999. 51(5): p. 991-1006. - doi:10.1006/ijhc.1999.0252
171. Mosier, K.L., et al., Automation bias: decision making and performance in high-tech cockpits. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 1998. 8(1): p. 47-63. - doi:10.1207/s15327108ijap0801_3
172. Lee, J.D. and K.A. See, Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance. Human Factors, 2004. 46(1): p. 50-80. - doi:10.1518/hfes.46.1.50.30392
173. Bradshaw, J.M., et al., The Seven Deadly Myths of Autonomous Systems. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 2013. 28(3): p. 54-61. - doi:10.1109/MIS.2013.70
174. Wickens, C.D., Automation Stages & Levels, 20 Years After. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2017: p. 1555343417727438.
175. Riley, V., A General Model of Mixed-Initiative Human-Machine Systems. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting, 1989. 33(2): p. 124-128. - doi:10.1177/154193128903300227
176. Parasuraman, R., T.B. Sheridan, and C.D. Wickens, A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans, IEEE Transactions on, 2000. 30(3): p. 286-297. - doi:10.1109/3468.844354
177. Endsley, M.R. and D.B. Kaber, Level of automation effects on performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. Ergonomics, 1999. 42(3): p. 462-92. - doi:10.1080/001401399185595
178. Woods, D.D., The Risks of Autonomy. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2016. 10(2): p. 131-133. - doi:10.1177/1555343416653562
179. Klein, G., et al., Ten challenges for making automation aʺ team playerʺ in joint human‐agent activity. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 2004. 19(6): p. 91‐95.
180. MAIB, Annual report 1999. 2000, Department of the Environment Transport and Regions.: London.
181. Ventikos, N.P., G.V. Lykos, and I.I. Padouva, How to achieve an effective behavioral-based safety plan: the analysis of an attitude questionnaire for the maritime industry. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 2014. 13(2): p. 207-230. - doi:10.1007/s13437-014-0061-1
182. Dekker, S. and E. Hollnagel, Human factors and folk models. Cognition, Technology & Work, 2004. 6(2): p. 79-86. - doi:10.1007/s10111-003-0136-9
183. Rasmussen, J., Risk management in a dynamic society: a modelling problem. Safety Science, 1997. 27(2): p. 183-213. - doi:10.1016/S0925-7535(97)00052-0
184. Turner, B.A., Man-Made Disasters. 1978, London: Wykeham Publications.
185. Dekker, S. and S. Pruchnicki, Drifting into failure: theorising the dynamics of disaster incubation. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 2014. 15(6): p. 534-544. - doi:10.1080/1463922X.2013.856495
186. Rankin, A., et al., Resilience in everyday operations: A framework for analyzing adaptations in high-risk work. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2014. 8(1): p. 78-97. - doi:10.1177/1555343413498753
187. Man, Y., M. Lundh, and S.N. MacKinnon. Facing the New Technology Landscape in the Maritime Domain: Knowledge Mobilisation, Networks and Management in Human-Machine Collaboration. in 9th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics. 2019. Orlando, Florida, USA: Springer International Publishing. - doi:10.1007/978-3-319-93885-1_21
188. Porathe, T., H.-C. Burmeister, and Ø.J. Rødseth, Maritime Unmanned Navigation through Intelligence in Networks: The MUNIN project. 2013, 12th International Conference on Computer and IT Applications in the Maritime Industries, COMPIT’13, Cortona, 15-17 April 2013.
189. Man, Y., et al., From Desk to Field - Human Factor Issues in Remote Monitoring and Controlling of Autonomous Unmanned Vessels. Procedia Manufacturing, 2015. 3: p. 2674-2681. - doi:10.1016/j.promfg.2015.07.635
190. Endsley, M.R., Situation Awareness Misconceptions and Misunderstandings. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 2015. 9(1): p. 4-32. - doi:10.1177/1555343415572631
191. Szalma, J.L., et al., Effects of Sensory Modality and Task Duration on Performance, Workload, and Stress in Sustained Attention. Human Factors, 2004. 46(2): p. 219-233. - doi:10.1518/hfes.46.2.219.37334
192. Fiske, S.T. and S.L. Neuberg, A Continuum of Impression Formation, from Category-Based to Individuating Processes: Influences of Information and Motivation on Attention and Interpretation, in Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, M.P. Zanna, Editor. 1990, Academic Press. p. 1-74.
193. Speier, C., J.S. Valacich, and I. Vessey, The Influence of Task Interruption on Individual Decision Making: An Information Overload Perspective. Decision Sciences, 1999. 30(2): p. 337-360. - doi:10.1111/j.1540-5915.1999.tb01613.x
194. Koch, C., The Quest for Consciousness: A Neurobiological Approach. 2004, USA: Roberts and Company Publishers.
195. Parkhurst, D., K. Law, and E. Niebur, Modeling the role of salience in the allocation of overt visual attention. Vision Research, 2002. 42(1): p. 107-123. - doi:10.1016/S0042-6989(01)00250-4
196. Prison, J., J. Dahlman, and M. Lundh, Ship sense - striving for harmony in ship manoeuvring, in WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs. 2013. p. 115-127.
197. Engström, J., G. Markkula, and V. Trent, Attention selection and task interference indriving: an action-oriented view, in 1st International Conference on Driver Distraction and Inattention (DDI 2009). 2009: Gothenburg , Sweden.
198. Porathe, T., A Navigating Navigator Onboard or a Monitoring Operator Ashore? Towards Safe, Effective, and Sustainable Maritime Transportation: Findings from Five Recent EU Projects. Transportation Research Procedia, 2016. 14: p. 233-242. - doi:10.1016/j.trpro.2016.05.060
199. Cohen, I., W.-P. Brinkman, and M.A. Neerincx, Modelling environmental and cognitive factors to predict performance in a stressful training scenario on a naval ship simulator. Cognition, Technology & Work, 2015. 17(4): p. 503-519. - doi:10.1007/s10111-015-0325-3
200. Itoh, K., et al., Risk Analysis of Ship Navigation by Use of Cognitive Simulation. Cognition, Technology & Work, 2001. 3(1): p. 4-21. - doi:10.1007/PL00011520
201. Prison, J. and T. Porathe. Navigation with 2D and 3D maps - a comparative study with maritime personnel. in the 39th Nordic Ergonomics Society Conference. 2007. Lysekil, Sweden.
202. Tian, H.B., B. Wu, and X.P. Yan. Challenges and developments of water transport safety under intelligent environment. in the 4th International Conference on Maritime Technology and Engineering. 2018. London, UK: Taylor & Francis Group.
203. Sauer, J., et al., Effects of display design on performance in a simulated ship navigation environment. Ergonomics, 2002. 45(5): p. 329-347. - doi:10.1080/00140130110116128
204. Shahir, H.Y., et al. Maritime situation analysis framework: Vessel interaction classification and anomaly detection. in 2015 IEEE International Conference on Big Data (Big Data). 2015.
205. Okazaki, T. and C. Nishizaki, Situation Awareness of Ship Maneuvering Simulator Training International Journal of Emerging Trends in Engineering & Technology, 2015. 3(1).
206. Porathe, T., J. Prison, and Y. Man, Situation awareness in remote control centres for unmanned ships, in RINA Human Factors in Ship Design and Operation Conference. 2014: London, UK. p. 93-101.
207. Kjeldskov, J. and M.B. Skov, Studying usability in sitro: Simulating real world phenomena in controlled environments. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 2007. 22(1-2): p. 7-36. - doi:10.1080/10447310709336953
208. Viktorelius, M. and M. Lundh, The Role of Distributed Cognition in Ship Energy Optimization, in Energy Efficient Ships. 2016: London, UK.
209. Man Y., Lundh M., MacKinnon S.: Maritime Energy Efficiency in a Sociotechnical System: A Collaborative Learning Synergy via Mediating Technologies. TransNav, the International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, Vol. 12, No. 2, doi:10.12716/1001.12.02.03, pp. 239-250, 2018
210. Viktorelius, M., Expanding practice theory in energy research - a cultural-historical activity perspective. Energy Research and Social Science, 2017. Under reviewing.
211. Kataria A., Holder E.H., Praetorius G.P., Baldauf M., Schröder-Hinrichs J.-U.: Exploring Bridge-Engine Control Room Collaborative Team Communication. TransNav, the International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, Vol. 9, No. 2, doi:10.12716/1001.09.02.02, pp. 169-176, 2015
212. Winograd, T., Bringing Design to Software. 1996, US: Addison-Wesley.
213. Parent, R., M. Roy, and D. St-Jacques, A systems‐based dynamic knowledge transfer capacity model. Journal of Knowledge Management, 2007. 11(6): p. 81-93. - doi:10.1108/13673270710832181
214. Johnson, H. and K. Andersson, Barriers to energy efficiency in shipping. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 2016. 15(1): p. 79-96. - doi:10.1007/s13437-014-0071-z
215. Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and K. Cukier, Big Data: A Revolution That Will Transform How We Live, Work, and Think. 2013, UK: John Murray.
216. Johnson, H., et al., Will the ship energy efficiency management plan reduce CO2 emissions? A comparison with ISO 50001 and the ISM code. Maritime Policy & Management, 2013. 40(2): p. 177-190. - doi:10.1080/03088839.2012.757373
217. Man, Y., M. Lundh, and S.N. MacKinnon, Managing Unruly Technologies in the Engine Control Room: from Problem Patching to an Architectural Thinking and Standardization. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 2018: p. 1-23.
218. EU. EfficienSea 2 - Efficient, Safe and Sustainable Traffic at Sea. 2015 [cited 2018 Sep 13]; Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/inea/en/horizon-2020/projects/h2020-transport/waterborne/efficiensea-2.
219. DMA. Maritime Cloud conceptual model. 2016 [cited 2018 Sep 14]; Available from: http://maritimecloud.net/.
220. DMA, Mid-Term Periodic Technical Report, Part B. EfficienSea2 - efficient, safe and sustainable traffic at sea. 2016, Danish Maritime Authority.
221. Foord, A.G. and W.G. Gulland, Can Technology Eliminate Human Error? Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2006. 84(3): p. 171-173. - doi:10.1205/psep.05208
222. Hollnagel, E., D.D. Woods, and N.C. Leveson, Resilience engineering: Concepts and precepts. 2006, Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
223. Hollnagel, E., The ETTO Principle: Efficiency-Thoroughness Trade-off: Why Things That Go Right Sometimes Go Wrong. 2009, Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
224. Woods, D.D., The price of flexibility, in Proceedings of the 1st international conference on Intelligent user interfaces. 1993, ACM: Orlando, Florida, USA. p. 19-25. - doi:10.1145/169891.169894
225. Perrow, C., Normal Accidents: Living with High Risk Technologies. 1984: Princeton University Press.
226. Flach, J.M., Complexity: learning to muddle through. Cognition, Technology & Work, 2011. 14(3): p. 187-197. - doi:10.1007/s10111-011-0201-8
227. Snowden, D.J. and M.E. Boone, A Leader's Framework for Decision Making. Harvard business review, 2007. 85(11): p. 68-76.
228. Marx, K. and F. Engels, Theses On Feuerbach, in Ludwig Feuerbach and the End of Classical German Philosophy. 1845, Progress Publishers: Moscow, USSR.
229. Winograd, T. and F. Flores, Understanding computers and cognition. 1986, Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
230. O'Leary, Z., The Social Science Jargon Buster. 2007, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. - doi:10.4135/9780857020147
231. Popper, K., The logic of scientific discovery. 1959, London: Hutchins & Co.
232. Squires, E.J., The Mystery of the Quantum World. 1994: CRC Press.
233. Latour, B., Aramis, Or, The Love of Technology. 1996: Harvard University Press.
234. Peirce, C.S., What Pragmatism Is. The Monist, 1905. 15(2): p. 161-181. - doi:10.5840/monist190515230
235. James, W., Pragmatism: A New Name for Some Old Ways of Thinking. Science, 1907. 26(667): p. 24.
236. Mead, G.H., The Social Psychology of George Herbert Mead. 1956: University of Chicago Press.
237. Dewey, J., The Quest for Certainty: A Study of the Relation of Knowledge and Action. 1929: Putnam. 14-25.
238. Patton, M.Q., Qualitative research & evaluation methods. 2002, Thousand Oaks Ca.: Sage. xxiv, 598 p.

Typ dokumentu

Bibliografia

Identyfikator YADDA

bwmeta1.element.baztech-a265b0e3-35df-4f04-957c-3f0abc35b0fb