Journal of Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers (대한산업공학회지)

Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers (대한산업공학회)
권호 표지

An Evaluation of the Operator Mental Workload of Advanced Control Facilities in Korea Next Generation Reactor

차세대 원자력 발전소 첨단 제어설비에 의한 운전원의 정신적 작업부하 평가

  • Byun, Seong Nam (Division of Mechanical and Industrial System Engineering, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Choi, Seong Nam (Instrumentation & Control Department, Korea Institute of Nuclear Safety)
  • 변승남 (경희대학교 기계.산업시스템공학부) ;
  • 최성남 (한국원자력안전기술원 제어계측실)
  • Published : 2002.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The objective of this study is to evaluate impact of computer-based man-machine interfaces of Korea Next Generation Reactor (KNGR) on the operator mental workload. Empirical experiments were conducted to measure the operator mental workloads of KNGR and Yong-Gwang Unit 3 and 4, respectively. A comparison analysis based on a NASA TLX revealed that Yong-Gwang Unit 3 and 4 were superior to KNGR in terms of the mental workload. Post-hoc analyses showed that the mental workload of senior reactor operators was significantly higher than those of reactor and turbine operators, regardless of plant types. The implications of the findings were discussed in detail.

Keywords

References

  1. Beatty, J. (1982). Task-evoked pupillary responses, processing load, and the structure of processing resources. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 276-292 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.91.2.276
  2. Biers, D. W. and McInerney, P. (1988). An alternative to measuring subjective workload: Use of SWAT without the card sort. Proceeding of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society, Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society
  3. Braby, C. D., Harris., D. and Muir, H. C. (1993). A psycho-physiological approach to the assessment of work underload. Ergonomics, 36, 1035-1042 https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139308967975
  4. Brookings, J., Wilson, G. F. and Swain, C. (1996). Psycho-physiological responses to changes in workload during simulated air traffic control. Biological Psychology, 42, 361-378 https://doi.org/10.1016/0301-0511(95)05167-8
  5. Eggemeier, F. T. and Wilson, G. F. (1991). Subjective and performance-based assessment of workload in multi-task environments. In D. L. Damas, Ed., Multiple Task Performance, 217-278, London: Taylor & Francis
  6. Gopher, D. and Braune, R. (1984). On the psycho-physics of workload: Why bother with subjective measures? Human Factors, 26, 519-532
  7. Hart, S. G. and Staveland, L. E. (1988). Development of NASAnx(Task Load Indek): Results of experimental and theoretical research. In P. A. Hanceck and N. Meshkati, Eds., Human Mental Workload. 139-183, Amsterdam: North Holland
  8. Hill, S. G., lavecchia, H. P., Byers, J. C., Bittier, A. C., Jr., Zaklad, A L. and Christ, R. E. (1992). Comparison of four subjective workload rating scales. Human Factors, 34, 429-440
  9. Itoh, Y, Hayashi, Y., Tsukui, I. and Saito, S. (1989). Heart rate variability and subiective mental workload in flight task validity of mental workload measurement using H.R.V. method. In M. J. Smith and G. Salvendy, Eds., Work with Computers; Organizational, Management, Stress and Health Aspects, 209-216, Amsterdam: Elsevier
  10. Meshkati, N., Hancock, P. A, Rahimi, M. and Dawes, S. M. (1990). Techniques in mental workload assessment. In J. R. Wilson, and E. N. Corlett (Eds), Evaluation of Human Work: A Practical Ergonomics Methodology, 749-782, London: Taylor & Francis
  11. Mulder, L. J. M. (1988). Assessment of Cardiovascular Reactivity by Means of Spectral Analysis. Unpublished Ph. D. Thesis. Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Groningen
  12. Norman, D. A and Bobrow, D. G. (1975). On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 44-64 https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(75)90004-3
  13. Nygren, T. E. (1991). Psychometric properties of subjective workload measurement techniques: Implications for their use in the assessment of perceived mental workload. Human Factors, 33, 17-31
  14. Ogden, G. D., Levine, J. M. and Eisner, E. J. (1979). Measurement of workload by secondary tasks. Human Factors, 21,529-548
  15. Reid, G. B. and Nygren, T. E. (1988). The Subjective Workload Assessment Technique: A scaling procedure for measuring mental workload. In P. A. Hancock and N. MesHati, Eds., Human Mental Workload., 185-218, Amsterdam: North Holland
  16. Sebok, A. (2000). Team performance in process control: influences of interface design and staffing levels. Ergonomics, 43, 1210-1236 https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130050084950
  17. Tsang, P. S. and Velazquez, V. L. (1996). Diagnosticity and multidimensional subjective workload ratings. Ergonomics, 39, 358-381 https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139608964470
  18. Vidulich, M. A. (1989). The use of judgement in subjective workload assessment: The subjective workload dominance technique. Proceeding of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society, Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society
  19. Wickens, C. D. and Hollands, J. G. (2000). Engineering Psychology and Human Performance. New York, NY; Harper Collins
  20. Wierwille, W. W. and Eggemeier, F. T. (1993). Recommendation for mental workload measurement in a test and evaluation environment. Human Factors, 35, 263-282
  21. Williges, R. and Wierwille, W. W. (1979). Behavioural measures of aircrew mental workload. Human Factors, 21, 549-574