A Study on the Effect of Human Laterality, Type of Computer and Noise on Operators’ Performance of a Data Entry Task

• Autorzy: Khan Z. A. , Rizvi S. A. H.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Effects of human laterality, type of computer and noise on computer operators’ performance of a data entry task were investigated. Seven right- and 7 left-motorsided male subjects performed the task on desktop and laptop computers in a sitting posture under varying noise levels. The mean number of characters entered per minute was statistically analysed. The right-motorsided operators entered more data than left-motorsided ones at each noise level. Operators performed better on desktop computers. Operators’ performance decreased when noise level increased from 82 to 92 dB(A) but it improved at 102 dB(A). Effects of laterality, type of computer and noise, and the interaction between laterality and noise were statistically significant. The interactions between laterality and type of computer, and type of computer and noise were statistically insignificant. Laterality was statistically significant at all noise levels and noise was statistically significant for right motor-sided operators only.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

equivalent noise level; motor-sidedness; visual display units; data entry task performance

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2009
• Tom: Vol. 15, No. 1
• Strony: 53--60
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 24 poz., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Khan Z. A.

• College of Engineering, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

autor

Rizvi S. A. H.

• College of Engineering, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

Bibliografia

• 1.Rizvi SAH. Effects of organismic and environmental factors on controls in a two wheeler driving configuration [doctoral dissertation]. Kanpur, India: Indian Institute of Technology Kanpur; 1984.
• 2.Life MA, Pheasant ST. An integrated approach to the study of posture in keyboard operation. Appl Ergon. 1984;15(2):83–90.
• 3.Hobday SW. Keyboard design to fit hands and reduce postural stress. In: Brown ID, Goldsmith R, Coombes K, Sinclair MA, editors. Proceedings of the 9th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association, Bournemouth, UK. London, UK: Taylor & Francis; 1985. p. 457–8.
• 4.Green DM, Fidell S. Variability in the criterion for reporting annoyance in community noise surveys. J Acoust Soc Am. 1991;89:234–43.
• 5.Smith AP. Noise and aspects of attention. Br J Psychol. 1991;82:313–24.
• 6.Cho ZH, Chung SC, Lim DW, Wong EK. Effects of the acoustic noise of the gradient system on fMRI: a study on auditory, motor, and visual cortices. Magn Reson Med. 1998;39:331–5.
• 7.Khan IA, Mallick Z, Khan ZA. A study on the combined effect of noise and vibration on operators’ performance of a readability task in a mobile driving environment. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics (JOSE). 2007;13(2):127–36.
• 8.Wheale JL, O’Shea NM. Noise and the performance of a four-choice psychomotor task. Ergonomics. 1982;25:1053–64.
• 9.Wilding J, Mohindra N, Breen-Lewis K. Noise effects in free recall with different orienting tasks. Br J Psychol. 1982;73:479–86.
• 10.Annet M. A classification of hand preference by association analysis. Br J Psychol. 1970;61:303–21.
• 11.International Labour Office (ILO). Working with visual display units (OSH series, No. 61). Geneva, Switzerland: ILO; 1989.
• 12.Grieco A, Molteni G, Piccoli B. Field study in news paper printing, a systematic approach to VDU operator strain. In: Grandjean E, Vigliani E, editors. Ergonomic aspects of VDTs. London, UK: Taylor & Francis; 1980. p. 185–94.
• 13.Broota KD. Experimental design in behavioural research. New Delhi, India: Wiley Eastern; 1989.
• 14.Daniels FS. Do the eyes have it? American Rifleman. 1981;129:38–48.
• 15.Landaeur AA, Armstrong S, Digwood J. Sex differences in choice reaction time. Br J Psychol. 1980;71:551–5.
• 16.Deluca CJ, Sabbahi MA, Roy SH. 1986, Median frequency of the myoelectric signal. Effects of hand dominance. Eur J Appl Physiol. 1986;55:457–64.
• 17.Badar MA. Studies on the effects of age and laterality under varying levels of illumination in an HCI environment [Master of Science thesis]. Aligarh, India: Aligarh Muslim University, Mechanical Engineering Department; 1990.
• 18.Cornell E, McManus IC. Differential survey response rates in right- and-left-handers. Br J Psychol. 1992;83:39–43.
• 19.Jone GV, Martin M. Handedness dependency in recall from everyday memory. Br J Psychol. 1997;88:609–19.
• 20.Oldfield RC. Handedness in musicians. Br J Psychol. 1969;60:91–9.
• 21.Gawron VJ. Performance effects of noise intensity, psychological set, and task type and complexity. Hum Factors. 1982;24:225–43.
• 22.Hartley L, Dunne M, Schwartz S, Brown J. Effect of noise on cognitive strategies in a sentence verification task. Ergonomics. 1986;29:607–17.
• 23.Johansson CR. Effects of low intensity, continuous and intermittent noise on mental performance and writing pressure of children with different intelligence and personality characteristics. Ergonomics. 1983;26:275–88.
• 24.Stave AM. The effect of cockpit environment on long-term pilot performance. Hum Factors. 1977;19:503–14.