Understanding human error detection as task interruptions

Research output: Other Conference ContributionsAbstractResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Experimental studies of human error detection have not made much progress since the 80s and 90s (e.g. Allwood, 1984; Rizzo et al., 1987; Sellen, 1994; Zapf et al., 1994). One of the reasons is because there is not an established methodological paradigm. A connection between interruption and error detection is proposed – when an error is detected and corrected, it is similar to handling an interruption because the original task has to be suspended and resumed later. The connection is based on Trafton et al.’s (2003) characterisation of interruption, which dissects interrupted activities into various measurable time-based components. A similar anatomy of the error detection process is proposed giving time-based measures such as detection lag, correction lag and resumption lag; error detection examples are discussed. The main contribution of the proposed characterisation is a methodological one – postulating a set of dependent measures for future systematic investigations of the error detection process.
Original languageEnglish
Publication statusPublished - 4 Aug 2012
Event34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society: Building Bridges Across Cognitive Sciences Around the World - Sapporo, Japan
Duration: 1 Aug 20124 Aug 2012
https://mindmodeling.org/cogsci2012/ (CogSci 2012 Proceedings)

Conference

Conference34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society
Abbreviated titleCogSci2012
CountryJapan
CitySapporo
Period1/08/124/08/12
Internet address

Fingerprint

anatomy
detection
experimental study

Cite this

LI, S. Y. W. (2012). Understanding human error detection as task interruptions. Abstract from 34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Sapporo, Japan.
LI, Simon Y. W. / Understanding human error detection as task interruptions. Abstract from 34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Sapporo, Japan.
@conference{1ca593b9ec4343648817542bf922dba9,
title = "Understanding human error detection as task interruptions",
abstract = "Experimental studies of human error detection have not made much progress since the 80s and 90s (e.g. Allwood, 1984; Rizzo et al., 1987; Sellen, 1994; Zapf et al., 1994). One of the reasons is because there is not an established methodological paradigm. A connection between interruption and error detection is proposed – when an error is detected and corrected, it is similar to handling an interruption because the original task has to be suspended and resumed later. The connection is based on Trafton et al.’s (2003) characterisation of interruption, which dissects interrupted activities into various measurable time-based components. A similar anatomy of the error detection process is proposed giving time-based measures such as detection lag, correction lag and resumption lag; error detection examples are discussed. The main contribution of the proposed characterisation is a methodological one – postulating a set of dependent measures for future systematic investigations of the error detection process.",
author = "LI, {Simon Y. W.}",
year = "2012",
month = "8",
day = "4",
language = "English",
note = "34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society : Building Bridges Across Cognitive Sciences Around the World, CogSci2012 ; Conference date: 01-08-2012 Through 04-08-2012",
url = "https://mindmodeling.org/cogsci2012/",

}

LI, SYW 2012, 'Understanding human error detection as task interruptions' 34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Sapporo, Japan, 1/08/12 - 4/08/12, .

Understanding human error detection as task interruptions. / LI, Simon Y. W.

2012. Abstract from 34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Sapporo, Japan.

Research output: Other Conference ContributionsAbstractResearchpeer-review

TY - CONF

T1 - Understanding human error detection as task interruptions

AU - LI, Simon Y. W.

PY - 2012/8/4

Y1 - 2012/8/4

N2 - Experimental studies of human error detection have not made much progress since the 80s and 90s (e.g. Allwood, 1984; Rizzo et al., 1987; Sellen, 1994; Zapf et al., 1994). One of the reasons is because there is not an established methodological paradigm. A connection between interruption and error detection is proposed – when an error is detected and corrected, it is similar to handling an interruption because the original task has to be suspended and resumed later. The connection is based on Trafton et al.’s (2003) characterisation of interruption, which dissects interrupted activities into various measurable time-based components. A similar anatomy of the error detection process is proposed giving time-based measures such as detection lag, correction lag and resumption lag; error detection examples are discussed. The main contribution of the proposed characterisation is a methodological one – postulating a set of dependent measures for future systematic investigations of the error detection process.

AB - Experimental studies of human error detection have not made much progress since the 80s and 90s (e.g. Allwood, 1984; Rizzo et al., 1987; Sellen, 1994; Zapf et al., 1994). One of the reasons is because there is not an established methodological paradigm. A connection between interruption and error detection is proposed – when an error is detected and corrected, it is similar to handling an interruption because the original task has to be suspended and resumed later. The connection is based on Trafton et al.’s (2003) characterisation of interruption, which dissects interrupted activities into various measurable time-based components. A similar anatomy of the error detection process is proposed giving time-based measures such as detection lag, correction lag and resumption lag; error detection examples are discussed. The main contribution of the proposed characterisation is a methodological one – postulating a set of dependent measures for future systematic investigations of the error detection process.

UR - https://mindmodeling.org/cogsci2012/papers/0589/index.html

UR - http://commons.ln.edu.hk/sw_master/2629

M3 - Abstract

ER -

LI SYW. Understanding human error detection as task interruptions. 2012. Abstract from 34th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Sapporo, Japan.