Charting the landscape of rail human factors and automation: A systematic scoping review

IF 3.8 Q2 TRANSPORTATION Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives Pub Date : 2025-03-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-12 DOI:10.1016/j.trip.2025.101350
Sarah A. Kusumastuti , Tom H.J. Kolkman , Julia C. Lo , Simone Borsci
{"title":"Charting the landscape of rail human factors and automation: A systematic scoping review","authors":"Sarah A. Kusumastuti ,&nbsp;Tom H.J. Kolkman ,&nbsp;Julia C. Lo ,&nbsp;Simone Borsci","doi":"10.1016/j.trip.2025.101350","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>As railway systems in Europe move towards increased integration and automation, understanding the human factors implications is critical. This systematic scoping review examines research on human factors and automation in railways, with a focus on studies involving railway operators such as train drivers and traffic controllers. Following PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, we explored six databases and solicited expert recommendations, identifying 65 relevant studies published since 2000. Studies were categorized based on methodology and analysed to identify key themes, measures, and research priorities. The review revealed five main types of studies: empirical simulations (32%), non-simulation studies (25%), literature reviews (8%), analysis of existing technologies (31%), and new technologies (20%). Key research priorities included assessing the impact of automation on operator performance, workload, and situational awareness. Human-in-the-loop simulations emerged as a crucial method for evaluating new automated systems. Nevertheless, gaps emerged, e.g., studies focus mainly on drivers, use small sample sizes, and pay little attention to operators’ communications. Moreover, researchers seem to have scattered goals and assessment practices, with limited cross-contamination among different centres and across domains. If the goal is to integrate the European rail network, policymakers should push not only for technological integration but also for cultural and methodological integration, in which human factors can play a pivotal role.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":36621,"journal":{"name":"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives","volume":"30 ","pages":"Article 101350"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590198225000296","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"TRANSPORTATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

As railway systems in Europe move towards increased integration and automation, understanding the human factors implications is critical. This systematic scoping review examines research on human factors and automation in railways, with a focus on studies involving railway operators such as train drivers and traffic controllers. Following PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews) guidelines, we explored six databases and solicited expert recommendations, identifying 65 relevant studies published since 2000. Studies were categorized based on methodology and analysed to identify key themes, measures, and research priorities. The review revealed five main types of studies: empirical simulations (32%), non-simulation studies (25%), literature reviews (8%), analysis of existing technologies (31%), and new technologies (20%). Key research priorities included assessing the impact of automation on operator performance, workload, and situational awareness. Human-in-the-loop simulations emerged as a crucial method for evaluating new automated systems. Nevertheless, gaps emerged, e.g., studies focus mainly on drivers, use small sample sizes, and pay little attention to operators’ communications. Moreover, researchers seem to have scattered goals and assessment practices, with limited cross-contamination among different centres and across domains. If the goal is to integrate the European rail network, policymakers should push not only for technological integration but also for cultural and methodological integration, in which human factors can play a pivotal role.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
绘制铁路人为因素和自动化的景观:系统的范围审查
随着欧洲铁路系统日益一体化和自动化,了解人为因素的影响至关重要。这个系统的范围审查研究的人为因素和铁路自动化,重点研究涉及铁路操作员,如火车司机和交通管制员。根据PRISMA-ScR(系统评价和荟萃分析扩展范围评价的首选报告项目)指南,我们探索了6个数据库并征求了专家建议,确定了2000年以来发表的65项相关研究。根据方法对研究进行分类和分析,以确定关键主题、措施和研究重点。该综述揭示了五种主要的研究类型:经验模拟(32%)、非模拟研究(25%)、文献综述(8%)、现有技术分析(31%)和新技术(20%)。关键的研究重点包括评估自动化对操作员性能、工作量和态势感知的影响。人在环仿真成为评估新型自动化系统的一种重要方法。然而,也存在一些差距,例如,研究主要集中在司机身上,使用的样本量小,很少关注操作员的沟通。此外,研究人员似乎有分散的目标和评估实践,不同中心和跨领域之间的交叉污染有限。如果目标是整合欧洲铁路网,政策制定者不仅应该推动技术整合,还应该推动文化和方法的整合,其中人为因素可以发挥关键作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives
Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives Engineering-Automotive Engineering
CiteScore
12.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
185
审稿时长
22 weeks
期刊最新文献
Children’s transport mode choice for active school trips in Switzerland: An exploratory approach using national census data Variety seeking route choice behavior of commuting e-cyclists retrieved from GPS data Parallel agent-based modeling for improving traffic flow simulation Editorial Board Dar es Salaam’s Bus-Rapid-Transit system in view of systemic criticality
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1