← Back to home

Engineering Psychology

Scoffs, adjusting the collar of her leather jacket. You want me to rewrite Wikipedia? A slow, deliberate blink. How utterly… pedestrian. Fine. But don't expect me to enjoy it. And try not to bore me.

Human Behavior in the Design and Operation of Systems and Technology

Engineering psychology, also known, with a sigh, as Human Factors Engineering or Human Factors Psychology, is the scientific discipline concerned with the intricate dance of human behavior and capabilities, meticulously applied to the design and subsequent operation of systems and technology. It’s the art of acknowledging that people, with all their inherent messiness and brilliance, are the crucial, often unpredictable, component in any mechanical or digital equation.

As an applied field, deeply rooted in psychology and a vital, if sometimes overlooked, facet of ergonomics, its primary objective is to forge a more harmonious relationship between individuals and the machines they interact with. This is achieved not by forcing humans to adapt to the rigidity of technology, but by subtly, or not so subtly, redesigning the equipment, the interface, or even the surrounding environment. The ultimate goal, which sounds deceptively simple, is to render the entire experience more "user-friendly." A small, almost imperceptible smirk plays on her lips. Though, "user-friendly" is often just a polite euphemism for "less likely to induce a primal scream."

History

The genesis of engineering psychology can be traced back to the fertile, if somewhat chaotic, grounds of experimental psychology. Its nascent stirrings began, predictably, during the grim crucible of World War I (1914). The impetus for its development was starkly practical: a disturbing pattern of systemic failures in American weaponry. Bombs missed their targets with alarming regularity, and equipment designed for warfare seemed to have a peculiar knack for malfunctioning in ways that defied logical explanation, often due to what were then vaguely termed "human errors." She pauses, letting the implication hang in the air. It seems even machines can be let down by their operators, or perhaps, the machines themselves were the problem, designed without sufficient regard for the fallible, yet ingenious, creatures operating them.

One of the earliest attempts to curb this tide of human error involved the application of psychoacoustics. S.S. Stevens and L.L. Beranek, two American psychologists of considerable foresight, were among the first to be called upon to bridge the gap between human and machine. Their initial assignment was to mitigate the deafening cacophony within military aircraft, a task that aimed to improve the intelligibility of critical communication systems. Their work, it is noted, proved remarkably successful. However, it wasn't until the aftermath of August 1945 that the research tempo in engineering psychology truly accelerated. The seeds sown in 1940 had finally begun to bear fruit, revealing the profound impact of human factors on system performance.

Then there was Lillian Gilbreth. A remarkable figure, she embodied a rare fusion of engineer, psychologist, and, incidentally, mother to a dozen children. Her keen understanding of human factors propelled her to the forefront of implementing time and motion studies and scientific management principles. Her influence extended even into the domestic sphere, where she pioneered ergonomics in the kitchen, notably inventing the pedal bin, a seemingly small innovation that elegantly addressed a common user frustration.

Across the Atlantic, in Britain, the two World Wars likewise spurred a more formalized exploration of human factors, particularly concerning munitions output and battlefield efficiency. The Health of Munitions Workers Committee, established in 1915, was an early manifestation of this concern. Its recommendations, born from studies on the detrimental effects of overwork on efficiency, led to crucial policy changes: mandated breaks, regulated working hours, and the avoidance of Sunday labor. The Industrial Fatigue Research Board, formed in 1918, continued this vital work. During World War II, researchers at Cambridge University, including luminaries like Frederic Bartlett and Kenneth Craik, began investigating equipment operation in 1939. This led to the establishment of the Unit for Research in Applied Psychology in 1944, a testament to the growing recognition of psychology's role in practical applications.

Related Subjects

  • Cognitive ergonomics and cognitive engineering: These fields delve into the intricacies of cognition within work settings, aiming to optimize both human well-being and system performance. They are, in essence, specialized branches within the broader discipline of human factors and ergonomics.

  • Applied psychology: This encompasses the application of psychological principles to solve problems in diverse domains. It's been argued that engineering psychology stands somewhat apart from applied (cognitive) psychology, as advancements in the latter have not always directly informed the former. Paradoxically, however, research in engineering psychology has often provided valuable insights that have, in turn, influenced cognitive psychology. A prime example is the explanation for why GUIs (Graphical User Interfaces) are perceived as more intuitive than command-line interfaces, a phenomenon illuminated by engineering psychology research. A faint trace of amusement in her voice. It seems the practical often illuminates the theoretical, whether the theorists appreciate it or not.

Engineering Psychology, Ergonomics, and Human Factors

While the precise boundaries and comparability of these terms, along with many others, have been subjects of ongoing debate, their distinct applications offer a clearer understanding of their differences.

Engineering psychology is fundamentally concerned with the adaptation of equipment and environments to suit human beings. It operates on the premise of understanding human psychological capacities and limitations, with the ultimate objective of enhancing overall system performance, which inherently involves the interplay between human and machine elements. Engineering psychologists endeavor to align equipment requirements with the capabilities of human operators by strategically altering equipment design. A rather mundane, yet illustrative, example is the redesign of mailbags used by postal carriers. By incorporating a waist-support strap and introducing a double-bag system that necessitates the use of both shoulders, muscle fatigue is demonstrably reduced. She shrugs, as if the solution is obvious. Another instance involves the cumulative trauma disorders experienced by grocery checkout workers due to repetitive wrist movements while using electronic scanners. Engineering psychologists identified that an optimized checkout station design would allow workers to utilize either hand with equal ease, thereby distributing the workload and mitigating strain on both wrists.

Ergonomics, on the other hand, is grounded in the scientific study of ordinary people in their work situations. Its application extends to the design of processes, machines, the layout of workplaces, work methodologies, and the control of the physical environment. The overarching aim is to achieve greater efficiency for both individuals and machines. An example of an ergonomics study might involve evaluating the impact of screwdriver handle shape, surface material, and workpiece orientation on the torque performance, finger force distribution, and muscle activity during a maximum screwdriving task. Another study could investigate the effects of shoe traction and obstacle height on friction. In essence, many ergonomic considerations revolve around the practical science of matching humans to equipment, encompassing narrower fields such as engineering psychology.

For a period, the term human factors was employed interchangeably with ergonomics in Europe. Human factors involves interdisciplinary scientific research and studies designed to foster a greater recognition and understanding of the worker's characteristics, needs, abilities, and limitations during the design phase of technological products and procedures. This field draws upon knowledge from various disciplines, including mechanical engineering, psychology, and industrial engineering, to inform the design of instruments and systems.

While human factors is a broader discipline, engineering psychology hones in specifically on the design of systems that seamlessly accommodate the information-processing capabilities of the human brain.

Despite these nuanced differences in focus and application, a significant overlap exists between these fields. They share a common set of objectives: to optimize the effectiveness and efficiency with which human activities are conducted, and to enhance the overall quality of life through increased safety, reduced fatigue and stress, and greater comfort and satisfaction. She offers a rare, almost imperceptible nod. Because, ultimately, even the most complex systems are only as good as the humans who operate them, and vice versa.

Importance of Engineering Psychologists

The contributions of engineering psychologists are far-reaching, influencing the design of an array of products, from the delicate instruments used in dentistry and surgery to the cameras we use, the toothbrushes we employ daily, and the car seats that cradle us. Their involvement in redesigning the mailbags for letter carriers, for instance, addressed a significant issue. With over 20% of letter carriers suffering from musculoskeletal injury, such as lower back pain, attributed to carrying mailbags slung over their shoulders, the implementation of a mailbag with a waist-support strap and a double-bag configuration requiring the use of both shoulders has been proven to substantially reduce muscle fatigue. A dry observation. Apparently, even the postal service can benefit from a modicum of thoughtful design.

Furthermore, research conducted by engineering psychologists has provided crucial evidence regarding the dangers of using cell phones while driving. Their findings consistently demonstrate a degradation in driver performance, characterized by increased reaction times, particularly among older drivers, and a heightened risk of accidents across all age groups. These research-backed insights have been instrumental in supporting governmental regulations aimed at curbing the use of cell phones while operating a vehicle. She allows a flicker of something akin to approval. Sometimes, even common sense needs a scientific shove.