Microsoft Word - Dealing With Task Interruptions in Complex Dynamic Environments Are Two Heads Better Than One?.docx

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Microsoft Word - Dealing With Task Interruptions in Complex Dynamic Environments Are Two Heads Better Than One?.docx"

せいごろうさわまつ
5 years ago
Views:

1 Dealing With Task Interruptions in Complex Dynamic Environments: Are Two Heads Better Than One? Sébastien Tremblay, François Vachon, Daniel Lafond, & Chelsea Kramer Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp , 2012 INTRODUCTION (Speier, Vessey, & Valacich, 2003) (Altmann & Trafton, 2002) (St. John & Smallman, 2008) (situation awareness: SA) (St. John, Smallman, & Manes, 2005) (command and control: C2) (McFarlane & Latorella, 2002; McGillis-Hall et al., 2009) (Brehmer, 2007) C2 C2 (Wickens, Mavor, & McGee, 1997) (Van Merriënboer & Sweller, 2005) (e.g., Allen & Hecht, 2004; Steiner, 1972) > (Devine, 2002) (Stewart & Barrick, 2000) (Stevens & Campion, 1994) (Lafond, Jobidon, Aubé, & Tremblay, 2011) 1

2 2016/01/12 (e.g., Diedrich et al., 2002) (MacMillan, Entin, & Serfaty, 2004) (Lafond et al., 2011) (Steiner, 1972) C2 C2 (microworld) (Brehmer & Dörner, 1993) C 3 Fire (Granlund, 1998) C2 > > 2 > (firefighters: FFs) (water tankers: WTs) (individual) > 1 (team/half-interrupted) > (team/all-interrupted) > 2 METHOD Participants Materials C 3 Fire 2

C3 Fire インタフェースは 40 火災層 (fire layer) > 火災赤色消火茶色焼け跡茶色空白無色地理空間オブジェクト層 (geographical objects layer) > 野原湖マツの木カバの木住宅風量風向参加者の統制下にあるユニット消防士貯水タンク風が強いほど隣接セルへ早く燃え移るユニット層 (unit layer) >

3 C3 Fire インタフェースは 40 火災層 (fire layer) > 火災赤色消火茶色焼け跡茶色空白無色地理空間オブジェクト層 (geographical objects layer) > 野原湖マツの木カバの木住宅風量風向参加者の統制下にあるユニット消防士貯水タンク風が強いほど隣接セルへ早く燃え移るユニット層 (unit layer) > 着火するまでの時間がそれぞれ異なる天候層 (weather layer) > 40 のグリッドの地理空間地図で構成 (Figure 1) それぞれ 4 つ配置され番号が振られたアイコンで表示課題を通して消防士貯水タンクのユニット間で頻繁に水の供給を調整する必要がある消防士 (firefighters: FF) 隣接する貯水タンクからの水の供給を受けて火災セルを消火可能貯水タンク (water tanks: WT) 消防士 2 名に供給できる水を運搬できるが湖で補充が必要ユニットを左クリックし目的地へドラッグするとユニットを移動できる 3

4 2016/01/12 TechSmith Morae software 1 TeamSpeak Systems TeamSpeak software Design and Procedure 1 3 > 8 > :00 7:15 20 > (Table 1) > > 4

5 > > > RESULTS Supervisory Control (monitoring effectiveness: ME) (Lafond et al., 2011) > Total time Idle!!!!" Total time > Total time > Idle FF+WT 90 3 > 30 (-30s) 30 (+30s) 30 (+60s) 5 > 3 5 (Figure 2) (F(2, 90) = 26.17, p <.001) (F(4, 45) = 5.04, p =.002) (F(8, 90) = 4.67, p <.001) > 4 (Fs > 4.52, ps <.03) > -30s (p =.353) > +30s (ps <.01) (ps <.005) > +60s (ps <.05) (ps <.05) 5

6 2016/01/12 Performance > > 2 3 (Figure 3) 6

(F(1, 27) = 493.90, p <.001) (F(2, 27) < 1, p =.406) (F(2, 27) = 4.70, p =.018) > (ps <.

7 (F(1, 27) = , p <.001) (F(2, 27) < 1, p =.406) (F(2, 27) = 4.70, p =.018) > (ps <.22) (p =.691) Resumption Lag > 1 (Figure 4) (F(2, 27) = 3.17, p =.058) > 2 (ps <.05) Communications 7

2016/01/12 1 4 30 8-120 -90 (-120s) -90-60 (-90s) -60-30 (-60s) -30 (-30s) +30 (+30s) +30 +60 (+60s) +60 +90 (+90s) +90 +120 (+120s) 2 8 (Figure

8 2016/01/ (-120s) (-90s) (-60s) -30 (-30s) +30 (+30s) (+60s) (+90s) (+120s) 2 8 (Figure 5) (Fs < 1, ps >.60) (F(7, 119) = 3.12, p =.005) > +30s +90s (all ps <.05) > (F(7, 63) = 1.13, p =.357) (r =.39, p =.01; r =.42, p =.005) > > 33% 8

9 DISCUSSION C2 > 1 2 > 2 1 9

10 2016/01/ (Altmann & Trafton, 2007) (St. John & Smallman, 2008) C2 > > (Arrow & McGrath, 1995) (Jobidon, Breton, Rousseau, & Tremblay, 2006; Lafond et al., 2011) (e.g., Jobidon et al., 2006) (Chong & Siino, 2006; Rukab et al., 2004) microworld PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS (e.g., Fitzgerald et al., 2011) 49% (Parush et al., 2011) 10

11 (Garbis & Artman, 2004) > 11

C O N T E N T S 1

2014 Vol.107 C O N T E N T S 1 Communications 3 Vol.107 2 3 Communications Vol.107 4 5 Communications 7 6 Vol.107 6 7 Communications Vol.107 8 9 Communications Vol.107 10 11 Communications Vol.107 12 13