The validation of three human reliability quantification techniques — THERP, HEART and JHEDI: Part 1 — technique descriptions and validation issues

Kirwan, Barry

doi:10.1016/s0003-6870(96)00044-0

Cited by 177 publications

(103 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…President's Commission on the Accident at Three Mile Island, 1979). Because of its origin, THERP has been used as a popular methodology of assessing human performance and has been cited as currently the most widely implemented technique (Kirwan, 1996).…”

Section: Technique For Human Error Rate Prediction (Therp)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using standard event tree logic, the probability of human failure can be calculated. The key resource to THERP analysis can be found within the THERP manual composed by Swain and Guttmann (1983) THERP only deals the individual errors, however the approach provides results that have a high level of face validity (Kirwan, 1996). The THERP manual provides many different HEPs pertaining to the usage of different equipment that can be encountered within a nuclear power plant (however a large number are generic and can be found across a variety of different organization) and the possible errors that can emerge during a procedure (e.g.…”

Section: Technique For Human Error Rate Prediction (Therp)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Applying Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to choose a human factors technique: Choosing the suitable Human Reliability Analysis technique for the automotive industry

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tThe Automotive industry has been developed into a complex and highly automated sector. This level of automation and complexity has led to the establishment of a work environment, where human machine interface and human reliability are now critical factors of performance especially for safety critical tasks. Many different methodologies for performing risk assessment considering human factors are already available in the literature, but they were often developed for other domains (aviation, nuclear and process industry). Their purpose is to support the root cause evaluation and estimate the probability of faulty human actions. The present paper introduces a method to support the evaluation and the choice of a suitable Human Reliability Analysis (HRA) technique for the automotive sector considering the ones proposed from other industrial domains. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) provides a way of assisting safety managers and risk assessors in the HRA technique selection process. This allows the selected HRA techniques to be evaluated based on relevant criteria for an application in an automotive manufacturing environment. An example of selected HRA techniques in this paper will be demonstrated in a case study. The example can also suggest implications to improve existing industry guidelines, international standards and regulations, which are frequently calling for a wide range of ergonomic factors to be considered in the risk assessment process. Further the case study should show potential benefits to organizations coming from the selection and application of the right HRA technique.

show abstract

Section: Technique For Human Error Rate Prediction (Therp)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Technique For Human Error Rate Prediction (Therp)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Applying Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to choose a human factors technique: Choosing the suitable Human Reliability Analysis technique for the automotive industry

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to many ergonomists, quantitative prediction of human performance is intractable due to individual differences and many interacting factors in real operation that affect the performance of people (Kirwan, 1996). However, during such prediction attempts, ways of improving people's performance could be identified that leads to overall improvement of system performance.…”

Section: Quantification Of Reliability Of Users' Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is similar to Human Error Probability (HEP) definition (see equation 4) which is used in Human Reliability Assessment (HRA). HRA deals with assessment of human errors potential in a system (Kirwan, 1996 By simulating the definition for HEP, the probability of incorrect use of sanitation facilities by the users could be defined as:…”

Section: Quantification Of Reliability Of Users' Practicesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Judgment under uncertainty; a probabilistic evaluation framework for decision-making about sanitation systems in low-income countries

Malekpour

Langeveld

Letema

et al. 2013

Journal of Environmental Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

for their great ideas, inputs and comments on this work. Working with Jules has indeed been a great pleasure for me, not only because he is an outstanding professor, but also because of the great person that he is. Double thanks to Francois for his confidence in me and for creating a great opportunity for my future experiences.I would also like to convey my sincere regards to Prof. Gertjan Medema who has always been a support for me in different stages of my master studies. Many regards to Eng. Amir Hajizadeh, my first and forever manager, who gave me the initial drive to pursue my studies in TU Delft.Loads and loads of appreciation to my mother and to my sweet little family in Delft: Wikke Novalia, Ravina Rukmina Binol, David Ginting and Anthonie Hogendoorn, and all my awesome friends from all over the world who created the most enjoyable moments of my life in the Netherlands. 2 SummarySanitation, as described by the World Health Organization (WHO), refers to the provisions of facilities and services for the safe disposal of human urine and faeces.On the outset of the 21 st century, inaccessibility of 40% of the world's inhabitants to sanitation facilities sounds like an international shock. This literally means that 2.6 billion people in the world still rely on a bucket, a bush or a backstreet for excretion.As an inheritance of the colonial period, for years emphasis was made on copying the western sanitary achievements by trying to provide sewerage coverage in developing countries. It was revealed later that the required investments in conventional sewerage systems exceed the allocated financial resources in many of the low-income countries and these sanitation options are not likely to reach the huge poor populations in those regions.Facing the failure of conventional solutions in many cases, alternative solutions (e.g. small-scale systems) were proposed for developing countries, but did not remain protected from criticisms either.Among all available sanitation options, decision makers and planners in developing regions of low-income countries have to encounter the dilemma of which path to choose. Low-income countries, due to their vast socio-economic inhomogeneity, are more complex target locations for selection of appropriate sanitation options. The dynamic situation in these regions with the rapidly growing populations (especially in the urban settings) and the changing socio-economic structures make decision-making a more fragile process. Technically, all options that are required to deal with the global sanitation crisis seem to have been developed already. However, the challenge remains in selection and implementation of the appropriate technologies in a way that the desirable outcomes would be resulted. Some decision-making support tools have been developed so far to address this problem by assisting the decision makers in their challenging task; an attempt that may be described as: The low-sighted leading the clueless, with a map that keeps changing.In the existing sanitation decision-making support ...

show abstract

“…However, the need of human interaction in providing the required services and support imposes a different challenge, that is, the issue of human reliability. Many researches have been found in the area of human safety but the integration of human error in an engineering system scenario has never produced reliable risk assessment due to the variability of data (Kirwan, 1996). Hence, when assessing the risk of a services and support contract, it is necessary to allow for a higher level of uncertainty in the final decision.…”

Section: Peoplementioning

confidence: 99%

Services and Support Supply Chain Design for Complex Engineering Systems

Mo¹

2011

Supply Chain Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The validation of three human reliability quantification techniques — THERP, HEART and JHEDI: Part 1 — technique descriptions and validation issues

Cited by 177 publications

References 4 publications

Applying Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to choose a human factors technique: Choosing the suitable Human Reliability Analysis technique for the automotive industry

Applying Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to choose a human factors technique: Choosing the suitable Human Reliability Analysis technique for the automotive industry

Judgment under uncertainty; a probabilistic evaluation framework for decision-making about sanitation systems in low-income countries

Services and Support Supply Chain Design for Complex Engineering Systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About