Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Hockey, G. R. J.
Right arrow Articles by Wastell, D. G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Hockey, G. R. J.
Right arrow Articles by Wastell, D. G.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Adaptability of Training in Simulated Process Control: Knowledge- Versus Rule-Based Guidance Under Task Changes and Environmental Stress

G. Robert J. Hockey

University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK, g.r.j.hockey{at}sheffield.ac.uk

Jürgen Sauer

University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland

David G. Wastell

Nottingham University, Nottingham, UK

Objective: The study examined the adaptability of different types of process control training across changes in task and environmental stress. Background: The literature on training leads us to expect greater flexibility for system-based training, as opposed to procedure-based training. However, the stress literature suggests that knowledge-based strategies (making use of executive control) may be more vulnerable under stress conditions. Method: Two groups were given 6 hr of training on the Cabin Air Management System (CAMS), a complex, multilevel, PC-based process control task, emphasizing either system knowledge or use of procedures. They were then required to carry out the task for 3 hr (with noise during the middle 1 hr) across a range of both familiar and unfamiliar fault scenarios. Results: For the primary control task, the system-trained group performed better, especially for less familiar and complex faults. However, for lower priority tasks requiring executive control, procedure-trained operators performed better and were less impaired by noise. Conclusion: System training was more effective for managing unexpected task events, whereas procedural training was better under noise. The results are interpreted in terms of the rationale for instructing operators in the range of strategies required for effective process skills in complex work environments. Application: Training methodologies for safety critical applications should aim to develop skill in the use of both procedural and system knowledge strategies. Operators should be trained in the most effective deployment of these strategies during unfamiliar task events and environmental stress and given stress exposure training.

Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Vol. 49, No. 1, 158-174 (2007)
DOI: 10.1518/001872007779598000


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?