2005
DOI: 10.1177/154193120504901423
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Task-Based Measurement of Force in Automotive Assembly Using Worker Self-Assessment, Observational Analysis and Electromyography

Abstract: Worker self-assessments of force and observational assessments are convenient and efficient ways of assessing force demands. Past studies have criticized the accuracy and reliability of these methods of assessment. This study related worker perceptions of peak hand force, observational ratings of peak hand force and peak finger flexor and extensor EMG to understand the reliability and accuracy of these subjective methods when used at a subtask level. Worker and observer ratings of force had moderate correlatio… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2009
2009

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

1
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 8 publications
(8 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Benchmarks and visual cues such as fluidity of motion, use of body weight, facial expressions, unnatural postures, and bulging muscles (Latko, 1997;Marshall & Armstrong, 2004) were used to estimate the subjects' hand force. Force, HAL, and posture were rated by three observers working in pairs (Ebersole & Armstrong, 2002, 2004Ebersole, Lau, & Armstrong, 2005). Agreement between raters was a requirement; for example, if a score between two raters differed by more than 1 point, that risk factor was discussed and re-rated until consensus was reached.…”
Section: Womack Armstrong and Likermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Benchmarks and visual cues such as fluidity of motion, use of body weight, facial expressions, unnatural postures, and bulging muscles (Latko, 1997;Marshall & Armstrong, 2004) were used to estimate the subjects' hand force. Force, HAL, and posture were rated by three observers working in pairs (Ebersole & Armstrong, 2002, 2004Ebersole, Lau, & Armstrong, 2005). Agreement between raters was a requirement; for example, if a score between two raters differed by more than 1 point, that risk factor was discussed and re-rated until consensus was reached.…”
Section: Womack Armstrong and Likermentioning
confidence: 99%