Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Advances in Human-Computer Interaction
Volume 2009 (2009), Article ID 642929, 10 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2009/642929
Research Article

Human Behaviour Analysis of Barrier Deviations Using a Benefit-Cost-Deficit Model

1Université Lille Nord de France, F-59000 Lille, France
2UVHC, Laboratoire d'Automatique et Mécanique et d'Informatique industrielles et Humaines (LAMIH), F-59313 Valenciennes, France
3CNRS, UMR 8530, F-59313 Valenciennes, France

Received 11 February 2009; Accepted 25 August 2009

Academic Editor: Mark Dunlop

Copyright © 2009 Philippe Polet et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. A. D. Swain, “A method for performing a human factors reliability analysis, monograph SCR-685,” Sandia Corporation, albuquerque, NM, USA, 1963.
  2. B. Kirwan, “Validation of human reliability assessment techniques—part 1 & 2,” Safety Science, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 25–75, 1997. View at Google Scholar
  3. E. Hollnagel, “Accident and barriers,” in Proceedings of the 7th European Conference on Cognitive Science Approaches to Process Control, pp. 175–180, Villeneuve d'Ascq, France, 1999.
  4. E. Hollnagel, “Risk + barriers = safety?” Safety Science, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 221–229, 2008. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  5. S. P. Smith, M. D. Harrison, and B. A. Schupp, “How explicit are the barriers to failure in safety arguments,” in Proceedings of the Computer Safety, Reliability and Security (SAFECOMP '04), Potsdam, Germany, September 2004.
  6. C. W. Johnson, Failure in Safety-Critical Systems: A Handbook of Accident and Incident Reporting, University of Glasgow Press, Glasgow, UK, 2003.
  7. M. Rogers, R. Cook, R. Bower, M. Molloy, and M. Render, “Barriers to implementing wrong site surgery guidelines: a cognitive work analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. Part A, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 757–763, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  8. L. J. Kecklund, A. Edland, P. Wedin, and O. Svenson, “Safety barrier function analysis in a process industry: a nuclear power application,” International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 275–284, 1996. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  9. J. Rasmussen, “Risk management in a dynamic society: a modeling problem,” Safety Science, vol. 27, no. 2-3, pp. 183–213, 1997. View at Google Scholar
  10. R. Amalberti, “The paradoxes of almost totally safe transportation systems,” Safety Science, vol. 37, no. 2-3, pp. 109–126, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  11. J. Reason, Human Error, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1990.
  12. A. Carpignano and M. Piccini, “Cognitive theories and engineering approaches for safety assessment and design of automated systems: a case study of a power plant,” Cognition, Technology & Work, vol. 1, pp. 47–61, 1999. View at Google Scholar
  13. P. Polet, F. Vanderhaegen, and R. Amalberti, “Modelling border-line tolerated conditions of use (BTCUs) and associated risks,” Safety Science, vol. 41, no. 2-3, pp. 111–136, 2003. View at Google Scholar
  14. P. Polet, F. Vanderhaegen, and P. A. Wieringa, “Theory of safety-related violations of system barriers,” Cognition, Technology & Work, vol. 4, pp. 171–179, 2002. View at Google Scholar
  15. G. Morel and C. Chauvin, “A socio-technical approach of risk management applied to collisions involving fishing vessels,” Safety Science, vol. 44, no. 7, pp. 599–619, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  16. D. Woods and E. Hollnagel, “Resilience engineering concepts,” in Resilience Engineering: Concepts and Precepts, E. Hollnagel, D. Woods, and N. Leveson, Eds., pp. 1–6, Ashgate, Prologue, London, UK, 2006. View at Google Scholar
  17. G. Morel, R. Amalberti, and C. Chauvin, “How good micro/macro ergonomics may improve resilience, but not necessarily safety,” Safety Science, vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 285–294, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar
  18. S. Zieba, P. Polet, F. Vanderhaegen, and S. Debernard, “Resilience of a human-robot system using adjustable autonomy and human-robot collaborative control,” International Journal of Adaptive and Innovative Systems, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 13–29, 2009. View at Google Scholar