在人机协作救援中使用交叉训练

IF 2.2 3区 工程技术 Q3 ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries Pub Date : 2024-02-05 DOI:10.1002/hfm.21025
Dan Pan, Di Zhao, Youchen Pu, Liang Wang, Yijing Zhang
{"title":"在人机协作救援中使用交叉训练","authors":"Dan Pan,&nbsp;Di Zhao,&nbsp;Youchen Pu,&nbsp;Liang Wang,&nbsp;Yijing Zhang","doi":"10.1002/hfm.21025","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Human–robot collaboration has been widely used in postdisaster investigation and rescue. Human–robot team training is a good way to improve the team rescue efficiency and safety; two common training methods, namely, procedural training and cross-training, are explored in this study. Currently, relatively few studies have explored the impact of cross-training on human–robot collaboration in rescue tasks. Cross-training will be novel to most rescuers and as such, an evaluation of cross-training in comparison with more conventional procedural training is warranted. This study investigated the effects of these two training methods on rescue performance, situation awareness and workload. Forty-two participants completed a path-planning and a photo-taking task in an unfamiliar simulated postdisaster environment. The rescue performance results showed that cross-training method had significant advantages over procedural training for human–robot collaborative rescue tasks. During the training process, compared with procedural training, participants were more likely to achieve excellent photo-taking performance after cross-training; after training, the length of the route planned by the cross-training group was significantly shorter than that of the procedural-training group. In addition, procedural-training marginal significantly increased the emotion demand, which proves that cross-training can well control the emotions of the operators and make them more involved in the rescue task. The study also found that arousal level increased significantly after the first cross-training session, and decreased to the same level as procedural training after multiple sessions. These results contribute to the application of cross-training in human–robot collaborative rescue teams.</p>","PeriodicalId":55048,"journal":{"name":"Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Use of cross-training in human–robot collaborative rescue\",\"authors\":\"Dan Pan,&nbsp;Di Zhao,&nbsp;Youchen Pu,&nbsp;Liang Wang,&nbsp;Yijing Zhang\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/hfm.21025\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Human–robot collaboration has been widely used in postdisaster investigation and rescue. Human–robot team training is a good way to improve the team rescue efficiency and safety; two common training methods, namely, procedural training and cross-training, are explored in this study. Currently, relatively few studies have explored the impact of cross-training on human–robot collaboration in rescue tasks. Cross-training will be novel to most rescuers and as such, an evaluation of cross-training in comparison with more conventional procedural training is warranted. This study investigated the effects of these two training methods on rescue performance, situation awareness and workload. Forty-two participants completed a path-planning and a photo-taking task in an unfamiliar simulated postdisaster environment. The rescue performance results showed that cross-training method had significant advantages over procedural training for human–robot collaborative rescue tasks. During the training process, compared with procedural training, participants were more likely to achieve excellent photo-taking performance after cross-training; after training, the length of the route planned by the cross-training group was significantly shorter than that of the procedural-training group. In addition, procedural-training marginal significantly increased the emotion demand, which proves that cross-training can well control the emotions of the operators and make them more involved in the rescue task. The study also found that arousal level increased significantly after the first cross-training session, and decreased to the same level as procedural training after multiple sessions. These results contribute to the application of cross-training in human–robot collaborative rescue teams.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55048,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hfm.21025\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hfm.21025","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, MANUFACTURING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人机协作在灾后调查与救援中得到了广泛应用。人机团队培训是提高团队救援效率和安全性的良好途径,本研究探讨了两种常见的培训方法,即程序培训和交叉培训。目前,很少有研究探讨交叉训练对救援任务中人机协作的影响。交叉培训对大多数救援人员来说都是新鲜事物,因此有必要将交叉培训与更传统的程序培训进行比较评估。本研究调查了这两种训练方法对救援表现、情境意识和工作量的影响。42 名参与者在陌生的模拟灾后环境中完成了路径规划和拍照任务。救援表现结果表明,在人机协作救援任务中,交叉训练法比程序训练法有明显优势。在训练过程中,与程序化训练相比,交叉训练后参与者更容易取得优异的拍照成绩;训练后,交叉训练组规划路线的长度明显短于程序化训练组。此外,程序化训练边际显著增加了情绪需求,这证明交叉训练能很好地控制操作者的情绪,使其更投入到救援任务中。研究还发现,唤醒水平在第一次交叉训练后明显提高,多次训练后下降到与程序训练相同的水平。这些结果有助于交叉训练在人机协作救援团队中的应用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Use of cross-training in human–robot collaborative rescue

Human–robot collaboration has been widely used in postdisaster investigation and rescue. Human–robot team training is a good way to improve the team rescue efficiency and safety; two common training methods, namely, procedural training and cross-training, are explored in this study. Currently, relatively few studies have explored the impact of cross-training on human–robot collaboration in rescue tasks. Cross-training will be novel to most rescuers and as such, an evaluation of cross-training in comparison with more conventional procedural training is warranted. This study investigated the effects of these two training methods on rescue performance, situation awareness and workload. Forty-two participants completed a path-planning and a photo-taking task in an unfamiliar simulated postdisaster environment. The rescue performance results showed that cross-training method had significant advantages over procedural training for human–robot collaborative rescue tasks. During the training process, compared with procedural training, participants were more likely to achieve excellent photo-taking performance after cross-training; after training, the length of the route planned by the cross-training group was significantly shorter than that of the procedural-training group. In addition, procedural-training marginal significantly increased the emotion demand, which proves that cross-training can well control the emotions of the operators and make them more involved in the rescue task. The study also found that arousal level increased significantly after the first cross-training session, and decreased to the same level as procedural training after multiple sessions. These results contribute to the application of cross-training in human–robot collaborative rescue teams.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
37
审稿时长
6.0 months
期刊介绍: The purpose of Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries is to facilitate discovery, integration, and application of scientific knowledge about human aspects of manufacturing, and to provide a forum for worldwide dissemination of such knowledge for its application and benefit to manufacturing industries. The journal covers a broad spectrum of ergonomics and human factors issues with a focus on the design, operation and management of contemporary manufacturing systems, both in the shop floor and office environments, in the quest for manufacturing agility, i.e. enhancement and integration of human skills with hardware performance for improved market competitiveness, management of change, product and process quality, and human-system reliability. The inter- and cross-disciplinary nature of the journal allows for a wide scope of issues relevant to manufacturing system design and engineering, human resource management, social, organizational, safety, and health issues. Examples of specific subject areas of interest include: implementation of advanced manufacturing technology, human aspects of computer-aided design and engineering, work design, compensation and appraisal, selection training and education, labor-management relations, agile manufacturing and virtual companies, human factors in total quality management, prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders, ergonomics of workplace, equipment and tool design, ergonomics programs, guides and standards for industry, automation safety and robot systems, human skills development and knowledge enhancing technologies, reliability, and safety and worker health issues.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information Taxonomy of performance shaping factors in manufacturing: A systematic literature review Beyond blame: A systemic accident analysis through a neutralized human factors taxonomy Issue Information
×
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:481959085
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