In a 1996 symposium at the annual meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Knapik presented a paper on the use of task-specific versus general training methods to improve manual material handling capability by military and civilian personnel. Task specific training uses the same tasks for training and testing, while general training uses a variety of tasks for training but a completely different set of tasks for testing. Performance improvement is significantly greater following task-specific training, partly due, apparently, to psychomotor learning.² Although gains in strength performance are smaller following general training, the advantage of the latter type of training is that it can be applied to a wide variety of tasks, similar to those faced in a number of MOSs (Knapik, 1996).

In addition to their efforts in the area of strength training for women, the groups at the U.S. Army Research Institute of Environmental Medicine and U.S. Army Research Laboratory have also been involved in the redesign of five sample Army tasks (dePontbriand and Knapik, 1996). The rationale behind task redesign includes two considerations: (1) increasing numbers of military personnel, including women and some of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) troops with whom U.S. forces have joined, are too small to handle much of the equipment and perform many military tasks that were designed to be commandeered by larger U.S. men; and (2) lowering physical demands should decrease job-related injuries, prolong ability to exert strength and increase endurance (increasing performance sustainment and maintenance), and permit more flexible personnel utilization. For example, of the 277 current MOSs, 175 require occasional lifting of 100 lb [45 kg] or more and frequent lifting of 50 lb [23 kg] or more. Approximately 20 percent of military-age males and 80 percent of military-age females are reported to be incapable of performing at this level (Headley and Rice, 1996). If such jobs could be redesigned to decrease the load-bearing requirement, more personnel would be strength-qualified to perform them.

Task redesign involves, first, the collection of all data pertaining to the nature of the tasks, training to perform the tasks, and accident reports associated with the tasks. Then, the tasks requiring the most strength are identified, and films of personnel performing each task according to prescribed methods are analyzed. Redesign options include engineering aids, alterations in packaging, and changes in the operator's physical movements (and possibly the number of personnel) used to execute the task. Observational evidence suggests that when faced with physically challenging tasks, military personnel may redesign the task on their own, using alternative strategies. Stevenson and coworkers (1996) have shown that women's box lift performance was closer to that of men's than scores on the incremental dynamic lift would predict, because women were able to shift the weight of the load when performing the box lift task.

Front Matter (R1-R16)

Executive Summary (1-24)

1 Introduction (25-32)

2 Body Composition (33-60)

3 Physical Fitness Policies and Programs (61-86)

4 Weight Management (87-108)

5 Nutritional Concerns of Military Women (109-126)

6 Pregnancy and Lactation and Postpartum Return-To-Duty Fitness (127-156)

7 Conclusions and Recommendations (157-170)

Appendixes (171-172)

A Workshop Summary, Agenda, Participants, and Abstracts (173-252)

B Practices and Policies Tables (253-262)

C Military Occupational Specialty Classification Tables (263-280)

D Search Strategy for Literature Review (281-284)

E Civilian Inquiry Letter and Table of Responses (285-290)

F Abbreviations (291-294)

G Bibliography (295-334)

H Biographical Sketches (335-338)

Index (339-352)