Nội dung được dịch bởi AI, chỉ mang tính chất tham khảo
Đánh giá nhận thức mạng trong hệ thống đường sắt Hà Lan: Những hiểu biết về nhận thức tình huống mạng và khối lượng công việc bằng cách sử dụng phân tích mạng xã hội
Tóm tắt
Nghiên cứu này tiếp cận từ góc độ nhận thức nhóm và điều tra nhận thức về hoạt động đường sắt, đặc biệt là kiểm soát giao thông đường sắt và giao thông hành khách. Một môi trường mô phỏng bàn được sử dụng để thực hiện nghiên cứu, trong đó các nguyên tắc thiết kế được giải thích. Nhận thức mạng được vận hành hóa thông qua nội dung và luồng giao tiếp và được nghiên cứu thông qua phân tích mạng xã hội (SNA). Các chỉ số trung tâm trong SNA, như là bậc, gần gũi và trung gian, được đánh giá trong các mạng lưới này. Là một phần của nghiên cứu, hai trường hợp được so sánh trong đó các quy trình hoạt động để giảm thiểu gián đoạn được thay đổi. Các biến phụ thuộc là các loại cấu trúc mạng giao tiếp khác nhau được hình thành cho luồng giao tiếp và cấu trúc mạng ngữ nghĩa cho nội dung giao tiếp. Mặc dù các so sánh định lượng giữa hai quy trình hoạt động liên quan đến luồng giao tiếp và mạng ngữ nghĩa của chúng không cho thấy sự khác biệt đáng kể, nghiên cứu này cung cấp một phương pháp để so sánh các điều kiện khác nhau.
Từ khóa
#nhận thức nhóm #hoạt động đường sắt #phân tích mạng xã hội #cấu trúc mạng giao tiếp #nhận thức tình huống mạngTài liệu tham khảo
Algemene Rekenkamer (2012) Aanbesteden door NS-Railinfrabeheer 1995–2000 (in Dutch)
Aydoğan R, Lo JC, Meijer SA, Jonker CM (2014) Modeling network controller decisions based upon situation awareness through agent-based negotiation. In: Meijer SA, Smeds R (eds) Frontiers in gaming simulation. Springer International Publishing, Cham, pp 191–200
Baber C, Stanton NA, Atkinson J, McMaster R, Houghton RJ (2013) Using social network analysis and agent-based modelling to explore information flow using common operational pictures for maritime search and rescue operations. Ergonomics 56:889–905
Caro PW (1973) Aircraft simulators and pilot training. Hum Factors 15:502–509
Cooke N, Gorman J (2006) Assessment of team cognition. In: Karwowski W (ed) International encyclopedia of ergonomics and human factors. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, United States, pp 270–275
Cooke NJ, Gorman JC (2009) Interaction-based measures of cognitive systems. J Cogn Eng Decis Mak 3:27–46
Cooke NJ, Salas E, Kiekel PA, Bell B (2004) Advances in measuring team cognition. In: Salas E, Fiore SM (eds) Team cognition: understanding the factors that drive process and performance. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC, pp 83–106
Cooke N, Gorman J, Kiekel P, Foltz P, Martin M (2005) Using team communication to understand team cognition in distributed vs. co-located mission environments. Technical report ONR Grant N00014-03-1-0580. New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM
Cooke NJ, Gorman JC, Kiekel. PA (2008) Communication as team-level cognitive processing. In: Letsky MP, Warner NW, Fiore S, Smith CAP (eds) Macrocognition in teams: theories and methodologies. Ashgate Publishing Ltd, Hampshire, pp 51–64
Cooke NJ, Gorman JC, Myers CW, Duran JL (2013) Interactive team cognition. Cogn Sci 37:255–285
Dormans J (2011) Beyond iconic simulation. Simul Gaming 42:610–631
Duke RD, Geurts J (2004) Policy games for strategic management. Dutch University Press, Amsterdam
Endsley MR (1988) Design and evaluation for situation awareness enhancement. Proc Hum Factors Soc Annu Meet 32:97–101
Endsley MR (1995) Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factors 37:32–64
Endsley MR, Bolté B, Jones DG (2003) Designing for situation awareness. Taylor & Francis Group, New York
Farrington-Darby T, Wilson JR (2009) Understanding social interactions in complex work: a video ethnography. Cogn Technol Work 11:1–15
Farrington-Darby T, Wilson JR, Norris BJ, Clarke T (2006) A naturalistic study of railway controllers. Ergonomics 49:1370–1394
Foltz PW, Martin MJ (2008) Automated communication analysis of teams. In: Salas E, Goodwin GF, Burke S (eds) Team Effectiveness in complex organizations and systems: cross-disciplinary perspectives and approaches. Routledge, New York, pp 411–432
Freeman J, Weil SA, Hess KP (2006) Measuring, monitoring, and managing knowledge in command and control organizations. Technical report. Aptima Inc, Washington, DC
Funke J (1991) Solving complex problems: exploration and control of complex systems. In: Sternberg RJ, Frensch PA (eds) Complex problem solving: principles and mechanisms. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 185–222
Golightly D, Wilson JR, Lowe E, Sharples S (2010) The role of situation awareness for understanding signalling and control in rail operations. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 11:84–98
Golightly D, Sandblad B, Dadashi N, Andersson A, Tschirner S, Sharples S (2013) A sociotechnical comparison of automated train traffic control between GB and Sweden. In: Dadashi N, Scott A, Wilson JR, Mills A (eds) Rail human factors: supporting reliability, safety and cost reduction. Taylor & Francis, London, UK, pp 367–376
Gorman JC, Cooke NJ, Winner JL (2006) Measuring team situation awareness in decentralized command and control environments. Ergonomics 49:1312–1325
Gregoriades A, Sutcliffe AG (2006) Automated assistance for human factors analysis in complex systems. Ergonomics 49:1265–1287
Hauland G (2008) Measuring individual and team situation awareness during planning tasks in training of en route air traffic control. Int J Aviat Psychol 18:290–304
Haythornthwaite C (1996) Social network analysis: an approach and technique for the study of information exchange. Libr Inf Sci Res 18:323
Houghton RJ, Baber C, McMaster R, Stanton NA, Salmon P, Stewart R, Walker G (2006) Command and control in emergency services operations: a social network analysis. Ergonomics 49:1204–1225
Kiekel PA, Gorman JC, Cooke NJ (2004) Measuring speech flow of co-located and distributed command and control teams during a communication channel glitch. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet 48:683–687
Klein G (2008) Naturalistic decision making. Hum Factors 50:456–460
Letsky M, Warner NW (2008) Macrocognition in teams. In: Letsky MP, Warner NW, Fiore S, Smith CAP (eds) Macrocognition in teams: theories and methodologies. Ashgate Publishing Ltd, Hampshire, pp 1–14
Lo JC, Meijer SA (2013) Measuring group situation awareness in a multi-actor gaming simulation. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet 57:177–181
Lo J, Van den Hoogen J, Meijer S (2013) Using gaming simulation experiments to test railway innovations: implications for validity. In: Pasupathy R, Kim SH, Tolk A, Hill R, Kuhl ME (eds) Proceedings of the 2013 Winter simulation conference. IEEE, Washington, DC, pp 1766–1777
McMaster R, Baber C, Houghton RJ (2005) Investigating alternative network structures for operational command and control. In: 10th international command and control research and technology symposium
Meijer SA (2012) Gaming simulations for railways: lessons learned from modeling six games for the Dutch infrastructure management. In: Perpinya X (ed) Infrastructure design, signaling and security in railway. IntechOpen, Croatia
Meijer S (2015) The power of sponges. Simul Gaming 46:512–535
Meijer S, Hofstede GJ, Beers G, Omta SWF (2006) Trust and tracing game: learning about transactions and embeddedness in a trade network. Prod Plan Control 17:569–583
Millot P (2015) Situation awareness: is the glass half empty or half full? Cogn Technol Work 17:169–177
Mogford RH (1997) Mental models and situation awareness in air traffic control. Int J Aviat Psychol 7:331–341
NS (2014) “Achter de Schermen” (in Dutch)
Owens H (2004) Rail reform strategies: the Australian experience. In: Ito T, Krueger AO (eds) Governance, regulation and privatization. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 279–303
Pickup L, Wilson JR, Sharpies S, Norris B, Clarke T, Young MS (2005) Fundamental examination of mental workload in the rail industry. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 6:463–482
Raser JC (1969) Simulations and society: an exploration of scientific gaming. Allyn & Bacon, Boston
Salas E, Prince C, Baker DP, Shrestha L (1995) Situation awareness in team performance: implications for measurement and training. Hum Factors 37:123–136
Salmon PM, Stanton NA, Walker GH, Jenkins DP (2009) Distributed situation awareness: theory, measurement and application to teamwork. Ashgate, Surrey
Salmon P, Stanton N, Jenkins D, Walker G (2011) Coordination during multi‐agency emergency response: issues and solutions. Disaster Prev Manage Int J 20:140–158
Schipper D, Gerrits L (2018) Differences and similarities in European railway disruption management practices. J Rail Transp Plan Manag 8:42–55
Schipper D, Gerrits L, Koppenjan J (2015) A dynamic network analysis of the information flows during the management of a railway disruption. Eur J Transp Infrastruct Res 15:442–464
Sorensen LJ, Stanton NA (2011) Is SA shared or distributed in team work? An exploratory study in an intelligence analysis task. Int J Ind Ergon 41:677–687
Sorensen LJ, Stanton NA (2012) Should we assess dıstrıbuted sıtuatıon awareness before, durıng or after command and control actıvıty? J Battlef Technol 15:41–48
Stahl G (2006) Group cognition: computer support for building collaborative knowledge. MIT Press, Cambridge
Stanton NA (2014) Representing distributed cognition in complex systems: how a submarine returns to periscope depth. Ergonomics 57:403–418
Stanton NA, Baber C (2006) The ergonomics of command and control. Ergonomics 49:1131–1138
Stanton NA et al (2006) Distributed situation awareness in dynamic systems: theoretical development and application of an ergonomics methodology. Ergonomics 49:1288–1311
Stanton NA, Salmon PM, Walker GH, Jenkins DP (2010) Is situation awareness all in the mind? Theor Issues Ergon Sci 11:29–40
Stanton NA, Salmon PM, Walker GH (2015) Let the reader decide: a paradigm shift for situation awareness in sociotechnical systems. J Cogn Eng Decis Mak 9:44–50
Steenhuisen B (2009) Competing public values: coping strategies in heavily regulated utility industries. Dissertation, Delft University of Technology
Tannenbaum SI, Mathieu JE, Salas E, Cohen D (2012) Teams are changing: are research and practice evolving fast enough? Ind Org Psychol 5:2–24
Tenney YJ, Pew RW (2006) Situation awareness catches on: what? So what? Now what? Rev Hum Factors Ergon 2:1–34
van den Hoogen J, Meijer SA (2012) Deciding on innovation at a railway network operator: a grounded theory approach. In: CESUN 2012 third international engineering systems symposium
van den Hoogen J, Meijer S (2014) Gaming and simulation for railway innovation. Simul Gaming 46:489–511
van den Top J, Steenhuisen B (2009) Understanding ambiguously structured rail traffic control practices. Int J Technol Policy Manag 9:148–161
Walker GH, Stanton NA, Baber C, Wells L, Gibson H, Salmon P, Jenkins D (2010a) From ethnography to the EAST method: a tractable approach for representing distributed cognition in. Air Traffic Control Ergon 53:184–197
Walker GH, Stanton NA, Salmon PM, Jenkins DP, Rafferty L, Ladva D (2010b) Same or different? Generalising from novices to experts in military command and control studies. Int J Ind Ergon 40:473–483
Weil SA, Foster P, Freeman J, Carley K, Diesner J, Franz T, Cooke NJ, Shope S, Gorman JC (2008) Converging approaches to automated communications-based assessment of team situation awareness. In: Letsky MP, Warner NW, Fiore S, Smith CAP (eds) Macrocognition in teams: theories and methodologies. Ashgate Publishing Ltd, Hampshire, pp 277–303
Werkwijze Verkeersleider (2012) ProRail VL Veiligheid, Logistiek en Vakmanschap-cluster Be- en Bijsturing (in Dutch)
Wildman JL, Salas E, Scott CPR (2013) Measuring cognition in teams. Hum Factors 56:911–941
Wilson JR, Norris BJ (2006) Human factors in support of a successful railway: a review. Cogn Technol Work 8:4–14
Young MS, Brookhuis KA, Wickens CD, Hancock PA (2015) State of science: mental workload in ergonomics. Ergonomics 58:1–17