scholarly journals Auditory and visual distractor decrement in older worker manual assembly task learning: Impact of spatial reasoning, field independence, and level of education

2009 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 300-317 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. F. Wiker ◽  
D. J. Schwerha ◽  
M. Jaraiedi
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Reasoning ◽  
Older Worker ◽  
Field Independence ◽  
Manual Assembly ◽  
Level Of Education ◽  
Assembly Task ◽  
Visual Distractor ◽  
Task Learning

Effect of distractors, age, and level of education upon psychomotor task learning

2007 ◽  
Vol 37 (9-10) ◽  
pp. 801-809 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana J. Schwerha ◽  
Steven F. Wiker ◽  
Majid Jaraiedi
Keyword(s):  
Level Of Education ◽  
Task Learning

Effect of Product Structure on Manual Assembly Performance

1992 ◽  
Vol 36 (10) ◽  
pp. 729-732
Author(s):  
Girish V. Prabhu ◽  
Martin G. Helander ◽  
Valerie L. Shalin
Keyword(s):  
Structure Factor ◽  
Product Structure ◽  
Manual Assembly ◽  
Assembly Task ◽  
Hierarchical Assembly ◽  
Two Factors ◽  
Assembly Instructions ◽  
Product Structures ◽  
Instruction Strategies ◽  
Assembly Performance

Using Maynard's description, an assembly task may be divided into various task elements like reach, select, grasp, move, position, and assemble (Ghosh and Helander, 1985). Activities such as “reach” and “move” are governed by biomechanics of body motions including human factors principles such as Fitt's law. This research investigated the effect of the structure of the assembly and the type of assembly instructions on performance. Two different product structures were used — a vertical assembly, built bottom-up, and a hierarchical assembly, consisting of several subassemblies. Two different instruction strategies were used: 1. top-down sequential instructions 2. No Instructions. The research showed that vertical products were easier for manual assembly, when provided with instructions. For all three dependant measures, there was no interaction effect between the two factors, namely product structure and instructions. Average time for completion was significant for both factors i.e. product structures ( F(1, 20) = 4.417, p < 0.0485) and instructions ( F(1, 20) = 5.886, p < 0.0248). However, time for learning was significant only for product structure factor ( F(1, 20) = 5.239, p < 0.033). Also, trials to learn was significant only for product structure factor ( F(1, 20) = 4.449, p < 0.047).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document