National Academies Press: OpenBook

Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey (1992)

Chapter: 4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists

« Previous: 3 Characteristics and Utilization of Human Factors Specialists
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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.

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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.

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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:

  1. Error/accident analysis,

  2. Human reliability analysis,

  3. Products liability law,

  4. Computer input tool design,

  5. Human/computer dialogue design,

  6. Speech recognition/synthesis,

  7. Teleoperators,

  8. Aging,

  9. Handicapped, and

  10. 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):

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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.

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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.

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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.

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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.

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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).

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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.

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×

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.

Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"4 The Education of Human Factors Specialists." National Research Council. 1992. Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1978.
×
Page 69
Next: 5 Supply and Demand of Human Factors Specialists »
Human Factors Specialists'Education and Utilization: Results of a Survey Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $50.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Does the education given by the nation's human factors graduate training programs meet the skill and knowledge needs of today's employers? Can the supply of trained human factors specialists be expected to keep pace with the demand? What are the characteristics, employment settings, gender distribution, and salaries of human factors specialists?

These and other questions were posed by the committee as it designed mail-in and computer-aided telephone surveys used to query human factors specialists. The committee evaluates its findings and makes recommendations aimed at strengthening the profession of human factors.

This book will be useful to educators as an aid in evaluating their graduate training curricula, employers in working with graduate programs and enhancing staff opportunities for continuing education, and professionals in assessing their status in relation to their colleagues.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!