舒适度评价研究的新趋势:提出一种衡量和评价认知、体位和生理舒适度感知贡献的框架

A. Naddeo, N. Cappetti, Mariarosaria Vallone, R. Califano
{"title":"舒适度评价研究的新趋势:提出一种衡量和评价认知、体位和生理舒适度感知贡献的框架","authors":"A. Naddeo, N. Cappetti, Mariarosaria Vallone, R. Califano","doi":"10.54941/ahfe100363","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In HMI design, several parameters have to be correctly evaluated in order to guarantee a good level of safety and well-being of users (humans) and to avoid health problems like muscular-skeletal diseases. ISO Standards give us a good reference on Ergonomics and Comfort: ISO 11228 regulation deals with several parameters for evaluating Postural Ergonomics in manual loads’ push/pull, in manual loads’ lifting and carrying and in repetitive actions. Those parameters can be synthesized in a “Postural Load Index” that represents the Ergonomics level of examined posture. Nothing has be done, by ISO, in order to give a method/criterion for evaluating comfort performances of products and workplaces. More than 100.000 scientific papers dealing with comfort and discomfort can be easily found in main scientific databases and most of these speak about relationship between environmental factors (like temperature, humidity, applied forces etc.) and perceived comfort/discomfort. Several papers follow the assumption that there is a relationship between self-reported discomfort and musculoskeletal injuries and that those injuries affect the perceived comfort; however, the theories relating comfort to products/processes and products/processes’ design characteristics are rather underdeveloped. One of the most recent and interesting paper about comfort perception and its evaluation is the Vink-Hallbeck (2012) one in which the Moes’ comfort perception model (2005) has been developed and improved. In our paper, a simplified model of comfort perception, that seems to work well with the Vink-Hallbeck one, has been proposed and takes into account four aspects that strongly affect the global comfort perception: (B) – User Biomechanics/Posture, (P) - Physiologic factor, (E) – Environment contribute, (C) – Cognitive factor. Each of these aspects can be split in sub-aspects that have to be taken into account in order to be evaluated and correlated to subjective comfort perception. This paper want to explain all those sub-aspects, analyze the state of the art about their evaluation and propose an easy-to-use framework for weighing and evaluating contributes coming from cognitive, postural and physiologic comfort perceptions (no environment’s factors have been studied) to the global comfort perception.","PeriodicalId":415611,"journal":{"name":"Advances in Social and Organizational Factors","volume":"28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"29","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New Trend Line of Research About Comfort Evaluation: Proposal of a Framework for Weighing and Evaluating Contributes Coming From Cognitive, Postural And Physiologic Comfort Perceptions\",\"authors\":\"A. Naddeo, N. Cappetti, Mariarosaria Vallone, R. Califano\",\"doi\":\"10.54941/ahfe100363\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In HMI design, several parameters have to be correctly evaluated in order to guarantee a good level of safety and well-being of users (humans) and to avoid health problems like muscular-skeletal diseases. ISO Standards give us a good reference on Ergonomics and Comfort: ISO 11228 regulation deals with several parameters for evaluating Postural Ergonomics in manual loads’ push/pull, in manual loads’ lifting and carrying and in repetitive actions. Those parameters can be synthesized in a “Postural Load Index” that represents the Ergonomics level of examined posture. Nothing has be done, by ISO, in order to give a method/criterion for evaluating comfort performances of products and workplaces. More than 100.000 scientific papers dealing with comfort and discomfort can be easily found in main scientific databases and most of these speak about relationship between environmental factors (like temperature, humidity, applied forces etc.) and perceived comfort/discomfort. Several papers follow the assumption that there is a relationship between self-reported discomfort and musculoskeletal injuries and that those injuries affect the perceived comfort; however, the theories relating comfort to products/processes and products/processes’ design characteristics are rather underdeveloped. One of the most recent and interesting paper about comfort perception and its evaluation is the Vink-Hallbeck (2012) one in which the Moes’ comfort perception model (2005) has been developed and improved. In our paper, a simplified model of comfort perception, that seems to work well with the Vink-Hallbeck one, has been proposed and takes into account four aspects that strongly affect the global comfort perception: (B) – User Biomechanics/Posture, (P) - Physiologic factor, (E) – Environment contribute, (C) – Cognitive factor. Each of these aspects can be split in sub-aspects that have to be taken into account in order to be evaluated and correlated to subjective comfort perception. This paper want to explain all those sub-aspects, analyze the state of the art about their evaluation and propose an easy-to-use framework for weighing and evaluating contributes coming from cognitive, postural and physiologic comfort perceptions (no environment’s factors have been studied) to the global comfort perception.\",\"PeriodicalId\":415611,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Advances in Social and Organizational Factors\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"29\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Advances in Social and Organizational Factors\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54941/ahfe100363\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in Social and Organizational Factors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54941/ahfe100363","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

摘要

在人机界面设计中,必须正确评估几个参数,以保证用户(人类)的良好安全和福祉,并避免肌肉骨骼疾病等健康问题。ISO标准在人体工程学和舒适性方面为我们提供了很好的参考:ISO 11228法规涉及几个参数,用于评估手动负载的推/拉,手动负载的提升和搬运以及重复动作中的姿势人体工程学。这些参数可以综合成一个“姿势负荷指数”,它代表了所检查姿势的人体工程学水平。ISO没有做任何事情来给出一个方法/标准来评估产品和工作场所的舒适性能。在主要的科学数据库中可以很容易地找到10万多篇关于舒适和不舒服的科学论文,其中大多数都谈到了环境因素(如温度、湿度、施加力等)与感知舒适/不舒服之间的关系。一些论文假设自我报告的不适与肌肉骨骼损伤之间存在关系,并且这些损伤影响感知的舒适度;然而,关于产品/过程的舒适性和产品/过程的设计特征的理论是相当不发达的。关于舒适感知及其评估的最新和有趣的论文之一是Vink-Hallbeck(2012),其中Moes的舒适感知模型(2005)得到了发展和改进。在我们的论文中,已经提出了一个简化的舒适感知模型,似乎与Vink-Hallbeck模型很好地工作,并考虑了四个方面,强烈影响整体舒适感知:(B) -用户生物力学/姿势,(P) -生理因素,(E) -环境贡献,(C) -认知因素。这些方面中的每一个都可以分成必须考虑的子方面,以便进行评估并与主观舒适感知相关联。本文想要解释所有这些子方面,分析其评估的最新进展,并提出一个易于使用的框架,用于衡量和评估来自认知,姿势和生理舒适感知(没有环境因素的研究)对整体舒适感知的贡献。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
New Trend Line of Research About Comfort Evaluation: Proposal of a Framework for Weighing and Evaluating Contributes Coming From Cognitive, Postural And Physiologic Comfort Perceptions
In HMI design, several parameters have to be correctly evaluated in order to guarantee a good level of safety and well-being of users (humans) and to avoid health problems like muscular-skeletal diseases. ISO Standards give us a good reference on Ergonomics and Comfort: ISO 11228 regulation deals with several parameters for evaluating Postural Ergonomics in manual loads’ push/pull, in manual loads’ lifting and carrying and in repetitive actions. Those parameters can be synthesized in a “Postural Load Index” that represents the Ergonomics level of examined posture. Nothing has be done, by ISO, in order to give a method/criterion for evaluating comfort performances of products and workplaces. More than 100.000 scientific papers dealing with comfort and discomfort can be easily found in main scientific databases and most of these speak about relationship between environmental factors (like temperature, humidity, applied forces etc.) and perceived comfort/discomfort. Several papers follow the assumption that there is a relationship between self-reported discomfort and musculoskeletal injuries and that those injuries affect the perceived comfort; however, the theories relating comfort to products/processes and products/processes’ design characteristics are rather underdeveloped. One of the most recent and interesting paper about comfort perception and its evaluation is the Vink-Hallbeck (2012) one in which the Moes’ comfort perception model (2005) has been developed and improved. In our paper, a simplified model of comfort perception, that seems to work well with the Vink-Hallbeck one, has been proposed and takes into account four aspects that strongly affect the global comfort perception: (B) – User Biomechanics/Posture, (P) - Physiologic factor, (E) – Environment contribute, (C) – Cognitive factor. Each of these aspects can be split in sub-aspects that have to be taken into account in order to be evaluated and correlated to subjective comfort perception. This paper want to explain all those sub-aspects, analyze the state of the art about their evaluation and propose an easy-to-use framework for weighing and evaluating contributes coming from cognitive, postural and physiologic comfort perceptions (no environment’s factors have been studied) to the global comfort perception.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信