Human error in relation to HCI

Human-computer interaction or HCI has evolved over the years. It is sometimes termed as human-computer interface or man-machine interface (MMI) (Faulkner, 1998). HCI refers to the “design, evaluation and implementation of interactive systems” for the purpose of human use as well as the study of its interrelated phenomena. HCI primarily focuses on the end user. It attempts to better understand how the user interacts with the computer. The tasks, functionalities, constraints, cognitive, environmental, and organizational aspects are considered to be significant in examining HCI (Rauterberg, Salem, & Mortel, 2005).

The present studies and researches sought to understand human errors, specifically in line with human-computer interaction as well as the causes of these errors. According to the action-theory based definition of the error, it is recommended that, without an objective, there is no criterion or standard to call specific actions as erroneous. For instance, if a person presses keys at random, an error cannot be encountered nor committed. Hence, the context of error implies the non-achievement of the objective.

Get quality help now

KarrieWrites

Verified writer

Proficient in: Human

5 (339)

“ KarrieWrites did such a phenomenal job on this assignment! He completed it prior to its deadline and was thorough and informative. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

In addition, if an error is caused by prevailing circumstances which is beyond the control of an individual, such person cannot speak of an error, one example is the lost of data due to blizzard or sabotage. The error can be both attributed to either the user or the machine (Reason, 1990), hence it can be said that Human-computer interaction has a relation with human errors or vice versa. This is because errors only appear in goal-oriented activities, and machines cannot commit errors because they do not have goals and intentions of their own.

In some situations, however, when the software has crashed or the system crashes, this may cause wrong outcome, then it seems, from the perception of the users, that the error was because of the problems of the machine that causes the error and not them. Conversely, errors in Human-computer interaction are commonly attribute to the uses. The notions that man is the unreliable part of the man-computer system, however, have not been able to theoretically justify such contention.

The main reason for the committed error is the notion that computer cannot understand the command, and the human has the full responsibilities of giving correct command to gain positive or successful result (Lewis & Norman, 1986). Human-computer interaction is a subset of the area of human factors which also includes the design of the interface, system/user communications as well as the involvement of the end-user (Carey, 1991). The context of human factors is defined as the interaction between computers, people and their workplaces (Carey, 1991).

Herein, the main goal of the human factors research is to establish date systems and workplaces which help to make people more satisfied and productive in their endeavors. In this generation, most software and computer have integrated human factors and these human factors integrations claims that the diverse utilization of computers is stimulating broad range of interest and attention in human factor issues and one of it is the human error issues (Helander, 1998).

The studies of human error are part of the human factors documents. Various investigations have emphasized that human errors is always the cause of the mismatch of the human skills to the computer software or system (Rasmussen, 1987). For example, it is a controversial notion to give blame either to he human or machine, when a file gets lost or corrupted. If the computer system has no back-up file, this may indicate that the system should be improved.

However, it is also important that the user has a relative skills and knowledge in saving document files to ensure that errors may not be committed. Various technical skills and capabilities in computer science are necessary in HCI research activities and studies for emerged as on of the major disciplines in computing. It also requires literacy in related fields and it often involves multidisciplinary collaboration, synthesis, adaptation, analysis, and design for human error.

In fact, the field of HCI is interdisciplinary for it involves social, organizational, psychology, and cognitive domains that are important to research in areas of social sciences like education, sociology, psychology, anthropology, communications, ergonomics, management, engineering, software development and graphic design (Gershon, 2000). Errors in HCI have enormous human and economic costs. On the human factor, errors heighten stress and anxiety at work in that they can disrupt the train of thought, the action plan, and lead to negative emotions.

On the other hand, the economic costs depend on the number of errors and the time expended in error diagnosis and recovery. Thus the topic of errors has gained much attention from HCI researchers and practitioners. Errors are used as performance measures and only a few attempts have been attempted to investigate the psychological aspects of errors in more detail or to relate errors to aspects of software design. Humans are considered to commit errors but not machines for they do not have intentions of their own and errors appear only in goal-oriented actions (Reason, 1990).

For instance, when the system crashes or a computer virus causes problematic results, then it is the error of the inventors or manufactures, and not the product itself for in the user's perspective, it is as if the computer was made for the a user to commit an error. Most of the evidence in the literature is based on data collected in the laboratory or in case studies; whereas experiments are concerned with aspects of internal validity and allow precise time keeping and accounting of errors, external validity is lower (Brodbeck et al. , 1992).

If one wants to generalize to work life, this is particularly crucial. For example, experiments do not tell us enough about the extent of user errors, the time spent in error recovery, or how people use support in an error situation in the working world. Employees are usually familiar with and better equipped to work with given software than experimental subjects. Furthermore, employees' tasks are usually more routines than laboratory tasks.