2017
DOI: 10.1088/1757-899x/277/1/012022
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Mental workload measurement in operator control room using NASA-TLX

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In the current study however, a modified version of the NASA-TLX was employed in which participants estimated their average task-load on a typical day during the first 12 months of the pandemic. This modification was based on previous research in which the NASA-TLX was used as an estimate of workload over longer periods of time, for example, by nurses [47], car production workers [48], diabetes patients [49] and control room operators [50] to estimate workload across a whole work shift. Although the use of the NASA-TLX as an estimate of task-load for whole day activities has been validated [49], it is possible that the retrospective average estimate used in the current study did not provide accurate or reliable measures of actual task-load during the pandemic.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In the current study however, a modified version of the NASA-TLX was employed in which participants estimated their average task-load on a typical day during the first 12 months of the pandemic. This modification was based on previous research in which the NASA-TLX was used as an estimate of workload over longer periods of time, for example, by nurses [47], car production workers [48], diabetes patients [49] and control room operators [50] to estimate workload across a whole work shift. Although the use of the NASA-TLX as an estimate of task-load for whole day activities has been validated [49], it is possible that the retrospective average estimate used in the current study did not provide accurate or reliable measures of actual task-load during the pandemic.…”
Section: Limitationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By adopting the categorization procedure by Sugarinda et al, [ 34 ] the task load scores were partitioned into 0 to 29 as “low workload” and 30 to 100 as “high workload”, to determine the workload of each of the respondents. Similarly, by adopting the categorization procedure by Dale et al, [ 43 ] the general health scores of the respondents were partitioned into 0 to 12 as “not at risk” and 13 to 30 as “at risk” (that is, more declined general health) to ascertain the general health of the respondents.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[31,32] The Chronbach alpha reliability of the instrument has been established by Mohammadi et al [33] as 0.897. The categorization of the workload scores into "low workload" and "high workload" was adopted from Sugarindra et al [34] 3.2.3. General Health Questionnaire.…”
Section: Nasa-tlx Questionnairementioning
confidence: 99%
“…• ISA: self-reported stress levels directly reported by the participant after finishing each task having different combinations of experimental factors (e.g., robot speed and camera number). • Weighted NASA: a modified raw NASA-TLX by multiplying weights ([5, 0, 4, 3, 2, 1]) on each NASA-TLX factor to provide a more accurate and personalized assessment of workload [28].…”
Section: Datasetmentioning
confidence: 99%