User image mismatch in anaesthesia alarms : a cognitive systems analysis

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd">
  <record>
    <leader>00000cab a2200000   4500</leader>
    <controlfield tag="001">MAP20130040707</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="003">MAP</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="005">20131209105117.0</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="008">131209e20131007esp|||p      |0|||b|spa d</controlfield>
    <datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">MAP</subfield>
      <subfield code="b">spa</subfield>
      <subfield code="d">MAP</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">875</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20120026827</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Raymer, Karen E.</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
      <subfield code="a">User image mismatch in anaesthesia alarms</subfield>
      <subfield code="b">: a cognitive systems analysis</subfield>
      <subfield code="c">Karen E. Raymer, Johan Bergström</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">In this study, principles of Cognitive Systems Engineering are used to better understand the humanmachine interaction manifesting in the use of anaesthesia alarms. The hypothesis is that the design of the machine incorporates built-in assumptions of the user that are discrepant with the anaesthesiologist's self-assessment, creating user image mismatch¿. Mismatch was interpreted by focusing on the user image¿ as described from the perspectives of both machine and user. The machine-embedded image was interpreted through document analysis. The user-described image was interpreted through user (anaesthesiologist) interviews. Finally, an analysis was conducted in which the machine-embedded and user-described images were contrasted to identify user image mismatch. It is concluded that analysing user image mismatch expands the focus of attention towards macro-elements in the interaction between man and machine. User image mismatch is interpreted to arise from complexity of algorithm design and incongruity between alarm design and tenets of anaesthesia practice.</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="w">MAP20100019818</subfield>
      <subfield code="t">Ergonomics : the international journal of research and practice in human factors and ergonomics</subfield>
      <subfield code="d">Oxon [United Kingdom] : Taylor & Francis, 2010-</subfield>
      <subfield code="x">0014-0139</subfield>
      <subfield code="g">07/10/2013 Volumen 56 Número 10 - octubre 2013 </subfield>
    </datafield>
  </record>
</collection>