4—
The Education of Human Factors Specialists

An objective of this study was to describe the scope of educational experiences of human factors specialists, the quality of that education, and the nature of formal educational programs for human factors specialists. This chapter is organized around these objectives.

SCOPE AND QUALITY OF EDUCATION

Where Do We Learn What We Do?

Respondents were asked, for each of 52 activities or tasks, whether they performed the activity as part of their current job and if so where they learned about it (formal education, continuing education, company training, personal study, on-the-job experience, other). Relatively few respondents indicated continuing education, company training, personal study, or other as where they learned about the various activities or tasks. The percentage of respondents indicating continuing education ranged from 2 to 13 across the 52 items; all but 5 items were under 10 percent. For company training, the range was from 1 to 15 percent with only 7 items at or above 10 percent. For personal study, the range was 2 to 19 percent with 22 above 10 percent. The ''other'' category never accounted for more than 1 percent of respondents on any item. Table 4.1 presents the 52 activities and tasks in order by percentage of respondents who perform them as part of their current job. The percentages of respondents learning from formal education or on-the-job experience correlate highly with the percentage performing the activity or task—.88 and .98, respectively. The correlation between formal educa



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey 4— The Education of Human Factors Specialists An objective of this study was to describe the scope of educational experiences of human factors specialists, the quality of that education, and the nature of formal educational programs for human factors specialists. This chapter is organized around these objectives. SCOPE AND QUALITY OF EDUCATION Where Do We Learn What We Do? Respondents were asked, for each of 52 activities or tasks, whether they performed the activity as part of their current job and if so where they learned about it (formal education, continuing education, company training, personal study, on-the-job experience, other). Relatively few respondents indicated continuing education, company training, personal study, or other as where they learned about the various activities or tasks. The percentage of respondents indicating continuing education ranged from 2 to 13 across the 52 items; all but 5 items were under 10 percent. For company training, the range was from 1 to 15 percent with only 7 items at or above 10 percent. For personal study, the range was 2 to 19 percent with 22 above 10 percent. The ''other'' category never accounted for more than 1 percent of respondents on any item. Table 4.1 presents the 52 activities and tasks in order by percentage of respondents who perform them as part of their current job. The percentages of respondents learning from formal education or on-the-job experience correlate highly with the percentage performing the activity or task—.88 and .98, respectively. The correlation between formal educa

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey TABLE 4.1 Source of Knowledge About Performing Human Factors Activities and Tasks (percentage) Activity or Task Performs in Current Job Received Formal Education in It Has On-The-Job Experience Prepare/conduct oral presentations 90 34 63 Prepare/contribute to written reports 85 42 58 Apply human factors criteria/principles 85 39 50 Analyze tasks 81 34 51 Prepare/contribute to project proposals 80 22 57 Evaluate reports of others 79 29 54 Specify user requirements 78 30 53 Interpret test and evaluation results 72 35 43 Design data collection procedures/questionnaires 68 34 41 Review/summarize prior literature 67 36 37 Interpret research results 64 38 36 Verify conformance to human factors specifications 63 19 42 Specify/perform data analysis 61 38 30 Collect field data 60 24 40 Plan/coordinate evaluations 57 20 39 Specify evaluation objectives 56 19 38 Design human-equipment interfaces 55 22 36 Develop criterion measures 54 22 35 Develop hypotheses/theory 52 31 29 Design workspace layouts 49 21 31 Design evaluations 48 20 32 Design software-user interface 48 16 32 Interpret engineering drawings 47 18 31 Assess mental workload 47 20 27 Prepare instruction/procedure documents 47 13 32 Develop/conduct computer simulations 46 15 24 Assess physical workload 45 18 27 Prepare software specifications 45 13 30 Prepare/review design drawings 45 12 31 Define instructional requirements 44 14 29 Specify training objectives 43 11 28 Assess training effectiveness 42 13 28 Collect laboratory data 40 24 23 Collect error/accident data 39 12 27 Prepare design mockups 38 9 26 Conduct training 37 12 25 Develop analytical models/methods 36 18 21 Design training aids 36 10 24 Develop training content/methods 35 11 22 Write/debug computer programs 32 18 16 Perform safety analyses 31 9 21 Analyze effects of environmental stressors 30 13 22 Assess performance risks 27 7 18 Design simulation systems 24 7 15

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey Activity or Task Performs in Current Job Received Formal Education in It Has On-The-Job Experience Conduct network analyses 24 9 13 Perform human reliability analyses 22 7 14 Prepare engineering drawings 21 11 13 Conduct root cause analyses 20 7 12 Prepare product warnings 18 5 12 Perform failure-mode-effect analyses 14 5 8 Develop/analyze fault trees 13 5 7 Support product liability litigation 11 3 7 Mean 45.4 18.1 28.8 Standard deviation 20.2 10.5 13.3 tion and on-the-job experience is .79. It appears that, in general, formal education tracks well the activities performed on the job. If performance on the job is a criterion of a need for education on an activity, then there are a few items for which the percentage of respondents receiving formal education is lower than would be expected: Preparing/contributing to written proposals, Verifying conformation to human factors specifications, Planning/coordinating evaluations, and Specifying evaluation objectives. There are also activities for which the percentage of respondents receiving formal education is a little higher than would be expected given the percentage of respondents actually performing them: Specify/perform data analysis, Develop hypotheses/theory, Collect laboratory data, Develop analytical models/methods, and Write/debug computer programs. The pattern is clear and not surprising to the panel: formal education tends to stress theoretical issues and laboratory research, while in practice evaluation studies are emphasized. This finding is consistent with the traditionally different roles of the university as educator and the employer as trainer.

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey Quality of the Educational Experience Several questions on the specialist survey relate to the quality of the education received by human factors specialists. Two questions deal with the issue from the specialist's perspective, that is, how they perceive the quality of their education. Two additional questions deal with the issue from the perspective of an employer, that is, how supervisors perceive the quality of the education of those they hire. The Human Factors Specialists' Perspective Survey respondents who received their highest degree after 1984 (i.e., within the law five years). were asked how well their formal education prepared them for their first human factors job. Responses were made on a 7-point scale from 1 (very poorly) to 7 (very well). A value of 4 represents the midpoint of the scale. Figure 4.1 presents the cumulative percentages Figure 4.1 Cumulative percentage of specialists (N = 405) and supervisors (N 241) who obtained their highest degree in the last 5 years responding to how well their formal education prepared them for their first human factors job.

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey for specialists and supervisors to this question. Overall, supervisors felt that formal education prepared the specialists less well than the specialists thought. Two-thirds (66.7 percent) of the specialists gave a response of "5 or above" (i.e., greater than 4) to the question, while less than half (40.9 percent) of the supervisors so responded. Respondents were also asked to indicate which of 77 topics they received training in during their formal education. If they indicated they received such training and they received their degree since 1984, they were asked, on a 7-point scale (1 = not very well; 7 = very well), how well the topic was covered. Table 4.2 presents, for each of the 77 topics, the percentage of all respondents receiving formal education in that topic and the mean rating of quality given. The correlation between the two columns of the table is .76, indicating that topics that were included in the education of more people also tended to be fated higher in quality than topics not covered as often. The topics that were rated below 4.0 (the midpoint) are listed below. Less than 22 percent of the respondents reported that these topics were covered in their formal education: Error/accident analysis, Human reliability analysis, Products liability law, Computer input tool design, Human/computer dialogue design, Speech recognition/synthesis, Teleoperators, Aging, Handicapped, and Maintainability. They divide into four categories. The first (items 1 through 3) deals with topics involved in accident and malfunction analyses. The second (items 4 through 7) deals with computer-based topics that have a relatively short history and have not been developed within academia until recently. The third (items 8 and 9) deals with social issues that are becoming more important but have not been given attention in formal education programs until recently. The last item (maintainability) cannot be easily placed within the other classes; certainly this topic has been important to human factors for many years, yet formal education has apparently not adequately addressed it. Several topics that were not taught very often (reported by less than 25 percent of the respondents) but when taught were covered at least adequately (assuming a mean rating of 4.0 or greater is adequate):

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey TABLE 4.2 Quality Ratings of Topic Coverage by Human Factors Specialists and Supervisors Topic Percentage Receiving Formal Educationa in the Topic How Well Topic Was Covered (1 to 7 Scale) Transportation systems 74 4.1 Process control 73 4.6 Experimental design 71 5.8 Univariate statistics 71 5.5 Computer program languages 69 4.6 Multivariate statistics 67 5.2 Facilities design 67 4.5 Perception 64 5.4 Learning 64 5.2 Visual processes 64 5.0 Oral presentation 64 5.0 Cognitive processes 63 5.1 Auditory processes 58 4.7 Survey methods 55 4.6 Laboratory instrumentation 54 4.8 Attention 53 4.9 Analytical models 53 4.8 Task analysis 53 4.8 Technical writing 52 5.0 Time and motion study 49 4.7 Physical environmental effects 49 4.5 Physical measurement 47 4.5 Motor abilities 46 4.5 Group dynamics 45 4.7 Subjective measurement 45 4.7 Group problem solving 45 4.6 Motivational and reward structures 43 4.7 Workload analysis 43 4.7 Computer simulation 43 4.3 Psychometrics 42 4.7 Physiological measurement 40 4.6 Operations research 39 4.8 Work station design 36 4.6 System requirements analysis 36 4.6 Health and safety 36 4.5 Design guidelines 36 4.4 Project management 35 4.5 Team performance 34 4.9 Design checklists 33 4.5 Manufacturing and quality control 32 4.7 Control design 32 4.5 Cost estimation 31 4.4

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey Topic Percentage Receiving Formal Educationa in the Topic How Well Topic Was Covered (1 to 7 Scale) Anthropometry 31 4.3 Human needs analysis 31 4.3 Function allocation 30 4.5 Panel display design 30 4.5 Computer architecture 29 4.4 Work physiology 29 4.2 Design walk throughs 27 4.4 Use of mockups 26 4.5 Manual control theory 26 4.1 Artificial intelligence 26 4.1 Software tools 25 4.3 Handtool design 25 4.1 Biomechanics 25 4.0 Computer display design 24 4.6 Organizational impact analysis 23 4.3 Usability evaluation 22 4.4 Aging 22 3.8 Communication systems 21 4.2 Error/accident analysis 20 3.9 Human reliability analysis 20 3.8 Speech recognition/synthesis 20 3.7 Human-computer dialog design 20 3.7 Instructional systems design 19 4.4 Handicapped 18 3.8 Maintainability 18 3.7 CAD/CAM 17 4.3 Robotics 17 4.1 Office automation 17 4.1 Negotiation 16 4.5 Aerospace systems 15 4.3 Products liability law 15 3.9 Command and control 13 4.3 Computer input tool design 13 3.9 Teleoperators 7 3.1 MANPRINT, etc. 5 4.1 Mean 37 4.5 Standard deviation 17.8 0.4 a Includes only those who received degrees since 1984.

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey Computer display design, Usability evaluation, Communication systems, Instructional system design. CAD/CAM, Office automation, Robotics, Negotiation, Aerospace systems, Command and control, and MANPRINT, etc. The Perspective of Employers of Human Factors Specialists Supervisors were asked to consider human factors personnel that they hired in the past two years and whether there were any skills or abilities that they lacked when they first came to work. Three-quarters (75 percent) responded that skills and abilities were lacking in new hires; when asked to list some examples, a wide range of responses were recorded. An analysis of these revealed the following deficiencies (mentioned more than 10 times): Experience on the job and in the field, Communication skills (written, oral, and interpersonal), Human factors and psychology knowledge and approach, Systems analysis (task analysis, function allocation, etc.), Experimental design and research skills, Organizational skills, Engineering and product/technical skills, Computer science, Government acquisition/contracting, and Analytical skills and methods. Supervisors were also asked if there were any topics in human factors university degree programs that they felt were not being taught or not being taught well enough. About half (54 percent) of the supervisors thought that there were. Analysis of the topics listed revealed essentially the same items as those found for skills and abilities lacking in new hires. EDUCATION PROGRAMS A questionnaire form was mailed to each of 59 U.S. education programs listed in the Directory of Human Factors Graduate Programs in the United States and Canada (Human Factors Society, 1988). The following profile is based on the 48 programs that returned questionnaires.

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey Program Description Table 4.3 lists the percentage of programs by department of primary affiliation. The majority of the programs are in engineering departments with the remainder of programs divided among psychology and other. Only four programs affiliated with something other than engineering or psychology; therefore, because of the small sample size, when data are presented by primary affiliation, these four programs are not discussed. Programs were asked to indicate any informal or formal links they had with programs outside their department. Across all programs, 33 percent reported some type of link with other departments. Among the engineering programs reporting links to other departments, 82 percent listed psychology first. Of the psychology programs with links, only 54 percent listed engineering first, the remainder listed links with human factors and business/management programs first. Figure 4.2 presents a distribution of programs by the decade in which they were established. Two things stand out. First is the accelerating growth of new programs in engineering departments compared with the irregular establishment of new programs in psychology departments. Second is the relatively large increase in new psychology programs in the 1980s compared with the number established in prior decades. Thirty-five percent of all of the programs are relatively young, having been started during the 1980s. These trends are encouraging and suggest that the number of programs dealing with human factors may continue to grow during the 1990s. Graduate Degrees Offered Among engineering programs, 88 percent offer both master's and doctorate degrees, the remainder offer only master's degrees. Among psychology programs, 47 percent offer both master's and doctorates, 21 percent offer only doctorates, and 32 percent offer only master's degrees. Table 4.4 summarizes degree requirements for master's and doctorates within engineering and psychology departments. The results should be TABLE 4.3 Primary Affiliation of Graduate Programs in Human Factors Affiliation Number Percent Engineering 25 52 Psychology 19 40 Other 4 8

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey FIGURE 4.2 Distribution of programs by decade established and affiliation. TABLE 4.4 Degree Requirements of Programs in Human Factors   Master's Doctorate Requirement Engineering Psychology Engineering Psychology Mean number of units requirements 11.1 10.7 27.8 26.4 Percentage requiring: Minor 21 0 50 31 Thesis 57 92 86 100 Practical experience 17 33 27 62 Percentage with optional thesis 35 8 14 0

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey viewed with caution due to the small number of programs responding to some items (in all cases: less than 25 engineering and less than 15 psychology master's programs; less than 15 engineering and less then 15 psychology doctorate programs). A few clear trends appear. Minors are required by a higher percentage of engineering programs than psychology programs at both the master's and doctorate level. Larger percentages of engineering programs have an optional thesis than is the case with psychology programs, for which a higher percentage require a thesis. Finally, practical experience is required by a higher percentage of psychology programs (at both the master's and doctorate levels) than is the case among engineering programs. Undergraduate Human Factors Across all programs, 26 percent reported having an undergraduate human factors program, concentration, or minor. The percentage of engineering (25 percent) and psychology (21 percent) programs with undergraduate offerings was similar. Among the four ''other'' programs, two indicated some form of undergraduate offering. Faculty A total of 279 core faculty members were listed as actively involved in the 48 human factors programs. Thus, there is an average of 5 to 6 core faculty per program. The median number per program is 4 to 5. It appears that on average, engineering programs (mean = 5.5 per program; median = 4 per program) have fewer core faculty than do psychology programs (mean = 6.2 per program; median = 6 per program). In fact, 44 percent of the engineering programs have 3 or less core faculty compared with only 5 percent of psychology programs. The program with the largest number of core faculty (22), however, is an engineering program. The largest number of core faculty in a psychology program was 12. For each core faculty member listed, the survey asked for the number of off-campus professional meetings attended last year at which a paper was given or a session was chaired. Nine programs did not supply information on the faculty listed. Across all programs, the median number of meetings per faculty member was 2. There was no difference between engineering and psychology faculty with respect to involvement in professional meetings. Across all programs, as well as within both engineering and psychology programs, the median percentage of faculty engaged in outside consulting is 67 percent. This proportion would indicate that in most programs there is ample opportunity for students to be exposed to real-world problems through the firsthand experience of their professors. Across all programs

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey and within both engineering and psychology programs, the median percentage of faculty with outside grants is 50 percent. Facilities and Resources Respondents were asked to rate, on a 7-point scale, the adequacy of their university and department libraries with respect to human factors books and journals, the adequacy (availability, age, quality) of computer hardware for faculty, and the adequacy of computer software for faculty. Figure 4.3 presents the cumulative distributions of these three ratings for all departments. There were no significant differences (p > .05) between engineering and psychology programs on the ratings. Although not significant, the mean rating of adequacy was lowest for libraries and highest for computer hardware. FIGURE 4.3 Ratings of adequacy of program resources.

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey Respondents were also asked to indicate, in an open-ended question, what needs their human factors program has in the way of additional laboratories, library facilities, or equipment. Only 35 programs responded to the question. Forty percent of those responding listed various types of specialized equipment. Several programs specifically listed equipment in work physiology and biomechanics. Computer equipment was listed by 37 percent of the programs, additional space was listed by 29 percent, and more human factors books and journals was listed by 20 percent. A little over half the programs (56 percent) indicated that they have received contributions of money or equipment in the past year from outside sources. The percentages did not differ significantly (p > .05) between psychology and engineering programs. When asked whether the support their program has received from the University increased at a rate above average, average, or below average compared with other university programs over the past few years, 31 percent indicated above-average, 49 percent average, and only 20 percent below-average increases. It appears that the support received by human factors programs is increasing at an average or above-average rate. A closer look, however, reveals that more engineering programs are receiving above-average support (37 percent) than is the case for psychology programs (22 percent). Ties to Industry and Government In the human factors specialist survey, respondents were asked whether their unit had any ties with universities that teach human factors courses; 44 percent of the respondents indicated such ties with universities. Listed below are the percentages of respondents that indicated specific activities with universities (the percentages add to more than 44 percent because multiple answers were permitted): Percentage Activities             30 Internships 26 Advising 21 Research contracts 20 Other This response represents a very substantial percentage of organizations that maintain contacts with university human factors programs. University programs were asked whether they had internship programs or used adjunct professors or guest lecturers. Table 4.5 presents the percentage of programs indicating such use of outside organizations. Although nearly half of the programs report some sort of internship program, only 72 students across all programs are currently involved. In like manner, al

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey TABLE 4.5 Programs with Ties to Industry/Government Tie Percentage of Programs Internships 48 Adjunct professorships 59 Guest lectures 57 though more than half of the programs report using adjunct professors, across all programs there are only 65 adjunct professors. In the past year, across all programs, there were only 77 guest lectures by business or government employees. These statistics suggest that university programs are only skimming the surface of potential contacts with business and government. When asked about the advantages of adjunct professors, respondents cited specialized expertise, contact with real-world problems and issues, the cost-effectiveness of hiring adjuncts, and the fact that the use of adjuncts frees up regular faculty for other things. A number of disadvantages were cited: adjuncts are not always available to teach or to interact with students (the most commonly cited disadvantage); it takes a lot of time and energy to maintain contact and schedule adjuncts; adjuncts have less commitment to the program than do regular faculty; and adjuncts are not necessarily good teachers and often lack interest in research. Advantages of using guest lecturers are similar to those cited for using adjunct professors: diversity, real-world applications, and information on what is happening in industry. About one-third of the programs that use guest lecturers reported no real disadvantages; other programs indicated difficulty in scheduling lecturers and the lack of coordination with the progression of material in the course. Cost was cited by only 12 percent of the programs as a disadvantage. Curriculum and Student Experiences Each program was asked to indicate how each of 77 topics were covered in their program: in required courses, elective courses, or not covered at all. Table 4.6 presents the topics and the percentages of programs indicating each category, organized by percentage of programs that cover the topic in required courses. Topics covered in required courses by at least two-thirds of the programs center around research methodology and statistics; sensory, cognitive, and motor abilities and processes; anthropometry and

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey TABLE 4.6 Topic Coverage in Required or Elective Courses (percentage of programs) Topic Required Course Elective Course Not Covered Univariate statistics 83 15 2 Experimental design 83 15 2 Visual processes 81 17 2 Auditory processes 79 19 2 Work station design 79 17 4 Cognitive processes 79 15 6 Analytical models 76 15 9 Oral presentation 75 7 18 Anthropometry: 74 17 9 Environmental effects 72 26 2 Work physiology 70 28 2 Motor abilities/limits 70 28 2 Perception 69 27 4 Task analysis 69 22 9 Control design 67 24 9 Attention 67 24 9 Panel display design 67 22 11 Hand tool design 64 19 17 Workload analysis 63 28 9 Computer display design 60 31 9 Function allocation 60 27 13 Design guidelines 58 24 18 Multivariate statistics 57 37 6 Computer program languages 57 30 13 Psychophysics/subjective measures 56 42 2 Health and safety 54 30 16 Biomechanics 53 36 11 Learning 49 40 11 System requirements analysis 48 43 9 Design checklists 48 26 26 Human needs analysis 46 36 18 Facilities design 46 35 19 Computer input tool design 46 29 25 Psychological measurement 45 41 14 Lab instrumentation 44 30 26 Human-computer dialog design 42 42 16 Human reliability analysis 42 36 22 Physical measurement 42 33 24 Technical writing/illustration 41 33 26 Time and motion study 40 36 23

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey Topic Required Course Elective Course Not Covered Error-failure-accident analysis 39 44 17 Manual control theory 36 40 24 Usability evaluation 34 23 43 Software tools 33 47 20 Design walk throughs 33 27 40 Psychometrics 32 41 27 Operations research 31 46 22 Manufacturing/quality control 30 42 28 Aerospace systems 29 33 38 Develop and use mock-ups 29 27 44 Process control 28 39 33 Computer simulation 26 57 17 Office automation 25 41 34 CAD/CAM 24 52 24 Product liability law 24 36 40 Survey methods 23 54 23 Maintainability 22 42 36 Project management 22 36 42 Motivation and reward structure 20 64 16 Aging 20 56 24 Speech recognition/synthesis 20 42 38 Communication systems 20 41 39 Team performance 20 33 47 Transportation systems 18 34 48 Cost estimation/budgeting 18 28 54 Robotics 17 57 26 Handicapped 16 57 29 Group dynamics 16 42 42 Group problem solving 16 33 51 MANPRINT, HARDMAN, etc. 14 16 70 Command and control 13 38 49 Artificial intelligence 11 72 17 Instructional systems design 11 34 55 Organizational impact analysis 7 33 60 Teleoperations 7 33 60 Computer architecture 7 31 62 Negotiation 5 25 70 Mean 41.2 33.3 24.2 Standard deviation 22.6 12.2 17.7

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey work physiology; design of displays, controls, and workstations; and oral presentations. The topics covered in required courses by one-quarter or less of the programs tended to be specific topics dealing with applications of human factors, such as office automation, CAD/CAM, aging, transportation systems, robots, and teleoperations; or they were more industrial/organizational topics, such as group dynamics, team performance, motivation, and organizational impact analysis. Somewhat disappointing was the number of programs that do not cover the topic of MANPRINT in their program (70 percent).; A comparison of the percentage of psychology and engineering programs that cover each topic in required courses revealed surprisingly few (18) significant differences (p < .05); Table 4.7 lists the topics that reached significance. In all but three cases, when differences occurred, engineering programs were more likely to cover the topic in required courses than were psychology programs. It appears that engineering programs are covering TABLE 4.7 Differences in Topic Coverage in Required Courses Between Engineering and Psychology Programs (percentage of programs) Topic Engineering Psychology Engineering Greater Than Psychology:     Work station design 92 58 Anthropometry 88 53 Work physiology 84 53 Hand tool design 84 31 Environmental effects 83 53 Computer programming language 76 42 Biomechanics 76 22 Facilities design 58 26 Operations research 58 4 Manufacturing/quality control 52 5 Process control 46 11 Computer simulation 40 10 Motivation and reward structure 35 5 Cost estimation/budgeting 29 5 Artificial intelligence 20 0 Psychology Greater Than Engineering:     Perception 46 95 Attention 41 90 Psychological measurement 32 67 Note: The table lists only differences that reached significance.

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey traditional psychology topics more than psychology programs are covering traditional engineering topics. Programs were also asked to indicate in an open-ended question what specialties were emphasized in their program. One-third of the programs listed human factors/ergonomics as a specialty that was emphasized. Listed below are specialties listed by more than two programs: Human-computer interaction 31 percent Cognitive processes 21 Biomechanics/work physiology 17 Visual displays 14 Safety 10 Human performance 7 Sociotechnical/organizational 7 Another 14 different specialty areas were listed by one or two programs. It appears that considerable diversity exists to allow people to pursue specific specialties. Respondents were asked if their program has responded to three specific areas: Defense Department initiatives such as MANPRINT, societal issues such as elderly and disabled people, and technical developments such as advanced manufacturing, robotics, and artificial intelligence. As would be expected, more engineering programs (96 percent) than psychology programs (68 percent) have reacted to technical developments. Reaction to societal problems is about equal among engineering (68 percent) and psychology (74 percent) programs. Hardly any programs (16 percent of both psychology and engineering) have reacted to Defense Department initiatives. Those that have responded have merely included the topic in their courses. This contrasts with the activities directed toward societal problems and technical developments: 21 percent report research activity on societal problems; 40 percent of the programs report research activities on technical development. And 27 percent report specific courses on societal problems; 23 percent report specific courses on technical developments. Each program was asked to indicate which of 40 human factors activities their students do as part of their classwork (Table 4.8). At least two-thirds of the programs include various communication activities (oral presentations, preparing proposals) and research activities (collect data, perform statistical tests). Activities performed by one-quarter of the programs or less seem to center on training and reliability-related analyses. Comparisons of the percentages of engineering and psychology programs that have students perform these activities showed few significant differences (p < .05) (Table 4.9).

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey TABLE 4.8 Student Performance of Various Activities as Part of Their Classwork (percentage of programs) Activity Students in Program Do as Part of Course Work Prepare/conduct oral presentations 88% Collect data in laboratory settings 85 Analyze tasks 85 Specify/perform statistical tests 81 Collect data in field settings 73 Design data collection procedures/questionnaires 71 Write/debug computer programs 71 Design workspace layouts 69 Prepare/contribute to proposals 69 Evaluate reports written by others 67 Design human-equipment interfaces 65 Assess physical workload 65 Interpret test and evaluation results 65 Analyze effects of environmental stressors 62 Develop analytical models/methods 58 Develop/conduct computer simulations 54 Assess mental workload 54 Design software interfaces 48 Verify design conformance to human factors specifications 46 Perform safety analyses 44 Develop criterion measures 42 Collect error/failure/accident data 42 Specify evaluation objectives 35 Assess effectiveness of training 33 Develop/analyze fault trees 31 Conduct network analyses 27 Prepare instructions/procedural documents 27 Prepare engineering drawings 27 Plan/coordinate evaluations 27 Prepare/review, design drawings to human factor's specifications 25 Prepare design mockups 25 Prepare specifications for software 25 Design training aids 25 Perform human-reliability analyses 25 Assess performance risks 23 Prepare product warnings 23 Perform failure-mode-effects analyses 23 Conduct training 21 Prepare training course materials/aids 13 Conduct root cause analyses 10 Mean 46.2 Standard deviation 22.3

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey TABLE 4.9 Differences in Student Performance of Various Activities Between Psychology and Engineering Programs (percentage of programs) Activity Engineering Psychology Engineering Greater Than Psychology:     Assess physical workload 80% 47% Perform safety analysis 60 26 Develop/analyze fault trees 48 16 Psychology Greater Than Engineering:     Analyze tasks 80 100 Assess mental workload 40 74 Prepare training materials 12 42 Note: The table lists only differences that reached significance. The Future Respondents were, asked, if they could change any parts of their programs, what they would change and what was preventing the change from happening. A total of 38 programs responded. Although numerous specific changes were mentioned, adding more faculty was mentioned by 34 percent of the programs responding. As might be expected, the reason given for not hiring more faculty was fiscal limitation or lack of support for the area within the department or school. Programs were also asked whether human factors education would change in the next five years and if so, how. Overall, 68 percent of the programs felt that human factors education would change in the next five years. A number of predictions were made; the dominant themes were that human factors education would be oriented more toward computers and industrial applications. Each of these were mentioned by 20 to 25 percent of the programs that responded. The Human Factors Society accreditation program was mentioned by five programs, predicting that the effect would standardize, formalize, and strengthen human factors education. One program predicted that small programs would suffer because of accreditation. Three programs predicted that education would become more specialized, a view that may be at odds with accreditation. Overall, the predictions were basically for "more of the same" and continuation of existing trends; no one predicted radical changes. KEEPING CURRENT Individuals were questioned about continuing education, professional activities, and books and periodicals that they read on a regular basis. Each of these sources of professional development is discussed in turn.

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey Continuing Education About half (51 percent) of all human factors specialists, but only 40 percent of supervisors, have taken a human factors continuing education course in the past five years. Universities were the main source of such courses (35.2 percent) with professional associations (27.5 percent) and employers (19.7 percent) also being important. Private organizations or privately offered courses (10.4 percent) were less important. Overall, there is general satisfaction with the quality of continuing education courses. About 80 percent of specialists and supervisors rate their quality ''5 or above'' on a 7-point scale. Among specialists and supervisors, 54 percent do not feel that they are getting enough continuing education. The reason given by 66 percent of these people is something other than lack of course availability. Although not stated, probably it is because of a lack of time and/or support from employers. Professional Activities Table 4.10 presents the percentages of specialists and supervisors that indicated various professional activities in the last five years. These figures represent an active profession with considerable involvement by the rank-and-file. Books and Periodicals Read Approximately 90 percent (86.3 percent specialists and 92.2 percent supervisors) reported that they read periodicals regularly. The Human Factors Society Journal and Bulletin, mentioned by 28 percent of the respondents, were the most frequently mentioned periodicals. Computer magazines of TABLE 4.10 Professional Activities Reported by Specialists and Supervisors Activity Percentage Reporting Attended meeting of:   1st organization mentioned 65.6% 2nd organization mentioned 55.0 3rd organization mentioned 57.8 Presented paper in past 5 years 60.5 Attended a workshop at a meeting 65.8

OCR for page 48
Human Factors Specialists' Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey TABLE 4.11 Frequently Cited References Reference Number of Times Cited Statistics/experimental design (various) 88 Military standards/handbooks (various) 81 Specific books: Sanders and McCormick (1987) 68 Van Cott and Kinkade (1972) 58 Salvendy (1987) 55 Woodson (1981) 47 Wickens (1984) 26 Boff, Kaufman, and Thomas (1986) 25 Eastman Kodak Company (1983, 1986) 25 Boff and Lincoln (1988) 24 Schneiderman (1987) 24 Smith and Mosier (1984) 21 one sort or another were the next most frequently mentioned, but these were cited by only 6 percent of the respondents. The number of different periodicals that were mentioned was staggering, including defense-oriented publications, industry trade magazines, psychology journals, business magazines, and industrial engineering and design publications. Interestingly, about one-third of the respondents reported that they did not regularly refer to any particular books in the course of doing their current job. Respondents who did refer to particular books were asked to list them. As with periodicals, the list was staggering and, in addition, often contained insufficient or contradictory information, making it difficult to determine what book was being used. Table 4.11 presents the references listed by more than 20 respondents. Statistics/experimental design books and military standards/handbooks were each treated as a class and therefore were mentioned more than specific books. The top four specific books mentioned included one textbook (Sanders and McCormick, 1987) and three handbooks (Van Cott and Kincade, 1972; Salvendy, 1987; Woodson, 1981). With this description of the education of human factors specialists and the characterization given in Chapter 3, we can examine the match or mismatch between the supply and demand of these professionals in the workplace.