Flight safety assessment based on an integrated human reliability quantification approach

Guo, Yundong; Sun, Yuqing

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0231391

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 35 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…At present, it is commonly stated across the safety-critical domains that human failure causes most accidents (in the range of 50-90% depending on the domain; e.g. Baybutt 2002; Guo and Sun 2020;Shappell and Wiegmann 1996). The United States National Highway Transport Safety Agency (NHTSA 2018) assigns 94% of road crashes to the driver, interpreted as '94% of serious accidents are caused by human error' (e.g.…”

Section: Consequences Of 'Human Error'mentioning

confidence: 99%

State of science: evolving perspectives on ‘human error’

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reviews the key perspectives on human error and analyses the core theories and methods developed and applied over the last 60 years. These theories and methods have sought to improve our understanding of what human error is, and how and why it occurs, to facilitate the prediction of errors and use these insights to support safer work and societal systems. Yet, while this area of Ergonomics and Human Factors (EHF) has been influential and long-standing, the benefits of the 'human error approach' to understanding accidents and optimising system performance have been questioned. This state of science review analyses the construct of human error within EHF. It then discusses the key conceptual difficulties the construct faces in an era of systems EHF. Finally, a way forward is proposed to prompt further discussion within the EHF community.Practitioner statement This state-of-science review discusses the evolution of perspectives on human error as well as trends in the theories and methods applied to understand, prevent and mitigate error. It concludes that, although a useful contribution has been made, we must move beyond a focus on an individual error to systems failure to understand and optimise whole systems.Abbreviations: CWA: cognitive work analysis; EAST: event analysis of systemic teamwork; EHF: ergonomics and human factors; FRAM: functional analysis resonance method; HEI: human error identification; HFACS: human factors analysis and classification system; HRA: human reliability analysis; OHS: occupational health and safety; Net-HARMS: networked hazard analysis and risk management system; SHERPA: systematic human error reduction and prediction approach; STAMP: systems theoretic accident model and processes ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

Section: Consequences Of 'Human Error'mentioning

confidence: 99%

State of science: evolving perspectives on ‘human error’

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To appraisal human error in daily control procedure of the steam boiler Can et al provided an extended HEART based on advanced version of decision making trial and evaluation laboratory (AVDEMATEL) integration. Guo and Sun [38] made an endeavor to quantify the APOA values in assessing human error in the aircraft manipulation process using HEART combined with improved analytic hierarchy process (IAHP) method.…”

Section: State Of the Artmentioning

confidence: 99%

Human reliability analysis in de-energization of power line using HEART in the context of Z-numbers

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Investigation reveals that a high percentage of incident causes are ascribed to some forms of human error. To effectively prevent incidents from happening, Human Reliability Analysis (HRA), as a structured way to represent unintentional operator contribution to system reliability, is a critical issue. Human Error Reduction and Assessment Technique (HEART) as a famous HRA technique, provides a straightforward method to estimate probabilities of human error based on the analysis of tasks. However, it faces varying levels of uncertainty in assigning of weights to each error producing condition (EPC), denoted as assessed proportion of affect (APOA), by experts. To overcome this limitation and consider the confidence level (reliability or credibility) of the experts, the current study aimed at proposing a composite HEART methodology for human error probability (HEP) assessment, which integrates HEART and Z-numbers short for, Z-HEART. The applicability and effectiveness of the Z-HEART has been illustrated in the de-energization power line as a case study. Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis is fulfilled to investigate the validity of the proposed methodology. It can be concluded that Z-HEART is feasible for assessing human error, and despite the methodological contributions, it offers many advantages for electricity distribution companies.

show abstract

“…A criteria weighing method (AHP) calculates the weight by a pairwise comparison using a nine-point scale [ 88 , 89 ]. Various studies employed the AHP method to calculate the weight of factors [ 90 , 91 ]. Additionally, the Entropy Method is an effective method to accurately weigh the relative importance of the identified criteria [ 92 , 93 ].…”

Section: Assessment and Simulation Of Hatc Securitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Benign or disordered development? Assessment and simulation of security of highly aggregated tourist crowds in China

Yin

2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Arising with increasing security issues in highly aggregated tourist crowds (HATCs), widespread attention has been dedicated to security status. Assessing and forecasting the security status of HATCs in various situations related to tourist destinations is an important strategy of security management. Thus, this study constructed a system dynamic flow diagram for the security evaluation of HATCs. The relevant data were collected on perceptions of crowded tourists through questionnaires at Tianyou Peak during China's National Day (Golden Week Holiday). Additionally, efforts were made to conduct online surveys at Shanghai Disney Park and Shilin Night Market in Taipei, since crowding always occurs in these two areas. Empirical results based on Vensim software suggest that HATC status is the result of the coupling of various influencing factors and the result of the benign coupling of the three subsystems: multi-source pressure, state variation, and management response. HATC security presents a changing trend of “increase-decrease-recovery”. Differences exist in the changes of HATC security status in different spaces and at different time nodes. The findings also indicated that HATCs that appear in the daytime are more stable than HATCs that appear at special time nodes. This study highlighted that the security management of HATCs should focus on systematization, differentiation, and precision management.

show abstract

Flight safety assessment based on an integrated human reliability quantification approach

Cited by 13 publications

References 35 publications

State of science: evolving perspectives on ‘human error’

State of science: evolving perspectives on ‘human error’

Human reliability analysis in de-energization of power line using HEART in the context of Z-numbers

Benign or disordered development? Assessment and simulation of security of highly aggregated tourist crowds in China

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About