Nuclear Engineering and Technology

Korean Nuclear Society (한국원자력학회)
권호 표지

HUMAN RELIABILITY ASSESSMENT IN CONTEXT

  • HOLLNAGEL ERIK (Cognitive Systems Engineering Laboratory, Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Linkoping)
  • Published : 2005.04.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Human reliability assessment (HRA) is conducted on the unspoken premise that 'human error' is a meaningful concept and that it can be associated with individual actions. The basis for this assumption it found in the origin of HRA, as a necessary extension of PSA to account for the impact of failures emanating from human actions. Although it was natural to model HRA on PSA, a large number of studies have shown that the premises are wrong, specifically that human and technological functions cannot be decomposed in the same manner. The general experience from accident studies also indicates that action failures are a function of the context, and that it is the variability of the context rather than the 'human error probability' that is the much sought for signal. Accepting this will have significant consequences for the way in which HRA, and ultimately also PSA, should be pursued.

Keywords

References

  1. Kirwan, B. A guide to practical human reliability assessment. London: Taylor & Francis, 1994
  2. Dougherty, E. M. Jr. Human reliability analysis - Where shouldst thou turn? Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 29, 3 (1990), pp. 283-299 https://doi.org/10.1016/0951-8320(90)90012-C
  3. Woods, D. D., Johannesen, L. J., Cook, R. I. & Sarter, N. B. Behind human error: Cognitive systems, computers and hindsight. Columbus, Ohio: CSERIAC, 1994
  4. Hollnagel, E. & Amalberti, R. The Emperor's New Clothes, or whatever happened to 'human error'? 4th International Workshop on Human Error, Safety and System Development, June 11-12, 2001, Linkoping, Sweden
  5. Rochlin, G. I. Safe operation as a social construct. Ergonomics, 42, 11 (1999), pp. 1549-1560 https://doi.org/10.1080/001401399184884
  6. Woods, D. D. & Cook, R. Nine Steps to Move Forward from Error. Cognition, Technology, and Work, 4, 2 (2002). pp. 137-144 https://doi.org/10.1007/s101110200012
  7. Swain, A. D. Comparative evaluation methods for human reliability analysis (GRS-71). Koln, Germany: Gessellschaft fur Reaktorsicherheit (1989)
  8. Hollnagel, E. Barriers and accident prevention. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate Publishing (2004)
  9. Hollnagel, E. Cognitive reliability and error analysis method. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science Ltd. (1998)
  10. Perrow, C. Normal accidents: Living with high risk technologies. New York: Basic Books, Inc. (1984)
  11. Reason, J. T. The contribution of latent human failures to the break down of complex systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (London), Series B. 327 (1990), pp. 475-484 https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.1990.0090
  12. Reason, J. T. Managing the risks of organizational accidents. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited (1997)
  13. Dougherty, E. M. Jr., & Fragola, J. R. Human reliability analysis. A systems engineering approach with nuclear power plant applications. New York: John Wiley & Sons (1988)
  14. Heinrich, H. W. Industrial accident prevention. McGraw-Hill (1931)
  15. Miller, D. P. & Swain, A. D. Human Error and Human Reliability. In G. Salvendy (Ed.) Handbook of Human factors. New York: Wiley (1987)
  16. Rasmussen, J. Trends in human reliability analysis. Ergonomics, 28, 8 (1985), pp. 1185-1195 https://doi.org/10.1080/00140138508963241
  17. Parry, G. W. & Mosleh, A. Control room crew operations research project (EPRI TR-105280). Palo Alto, CA: Electrical Power research Institute (1995)
  18. Gertman, D. I., Gilmore, W. E. & Ryan, T. G. NUCLARR and human reliability: Data sources and data profile. Conference Record for 1988 IEEE Fourth Conference on Human Factors and Power Plants, June 5-9, 1988, Monterey, CA. (pp. 311-314) https://doi.org/10.1109/HFPP.1988.27519
  19. Hannaman, G. W., Spurgin, A. J. & Lukic, Y. D. Human cognitive reliability model for PRA analysis (NUS-4531). Palo Alto, CA: Electric Power Research Institute (1984)
  20. Yoshikawa, H. & Wu, W. An experimental study on estimating human error probability (HEP) parameters for PSA/HRA by using human model simulation. Ergonomics, 42, 11 (1999), pp. 1588-1595 https://doi.org/10.1080/001401399184910
  21. Swain, A. D. Human reliability analysis: Need, status, trends and limitations. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 29 (1990), pp. 301-313 https://doi.org/10.1016/0951-8320(90)90013-D
  22. Hollnagel, E. & Wreathall, J. HRA at the turning point? In P. C. Cacciabue & I. Papazoglou (Eds.), Probabilistic safety assessment and management '96. Berlin: Springer Verlag (1996)
  23. Cooper, S. E., Ramey-Smith, A. M., Wreathall, J., Parry, G. W., Bley, D. C., Luckas, W. J., Taylor, J. H. & Barriere, M. T. A technique for human error analysis (ATHEANA) (NUREG/CR-6350). Washington, DC: US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1996)
  24. Bieder, C., Le Bot, P., Desmares, E., Bonnet, J.-L. & Cara,F. MERMOS: EDF''s new advanced HRA method. PSAM 4, New York, pp. 129-134, Springer-Verlag, London (1998)
  25. Dekker, S. W. A. & Hollnagel, E. Human factors and folk models. Cognition, Technology & Work, 6 (2004), pp. 79-86 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-003-0136-9
  26. Swain, A. D. & Guttman, H. E. Handbook of human reliability analysis with emphasis on nuclear power plant applications (NUREG CR-1278). Washington, DC: NRC (1983)
  27. Simon, H. A. The sciences of the artificial. Cambridge, MA.: The M. I. T. Press (1972)
  28. Hall, R. E., Fragola, J. & Wreathall, J. Post event human decision errors: Operator action tree / time reliability correlation (NUREG/CR-3010). Washington, DC: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (1982)
  29. Williams, J. C. A data-based method for assessing and reducing human error to improve operational performance. Proceedings of IEEE 4th Conference on Human factors in Power Plants, Monterey, CA, 6-9 June 1988 https://doi.org/10.1109/HFPP.1988.27540
  30. Hollnagel, E. & Woods, D. D. Joint cognitive systems: Foundations of cognitive systems engineering. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press (2005)
  31. Fujita, Y. & Hollnagel, E. Failures without errors: Quantification of context in HRA. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 83, 2 (2004), pp. 145-151 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2003.09.006
  32. Hutchins, E. Cognition in the wild. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (1995)