The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Effects of “Workarounds” on Perceptions of Problem Importance during Operational Test
Abstract
“Workarounds” are nonstandard procedures operators devise to compensate for system deficiencies. This study investigated the impact of workarounds on the perceived importance of problems discovered during operational test. Questionnaire data were collected for 73 reported design deficiencies to assess the existence and effectiveness of workarounds and the importance of the tasks they affected to mission success. Problems were viewed as more important when workarounds were ineffective or time consuming, and when the tasks affected were deemed critical to mission success. Implications for problem prioritization are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“They are nonstandard procedures typically used because of deficiencies in system or workflow design.”
From Workarounds to Barcode Medication Administration Systems: Their Occurrences, Causes, and Threats to Patient Safety (2008) · cites this paper as [17]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Still being checked.
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Koppel, R., Wetterneck, T., Telles, J. L., & Karsh, B.-T. (2008) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m2616 · Cited by 685
Alter, S. (2014) · Communications of the Association for Information Systems · doi:10.17705/1cais.03455 · Cited by 338
Why Managers Tolerate Workarounds – The Role of Information Systems
Röder, N., Wiesche, M., Schermann, M., & Krcmar, H. (2014) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · Cited by 28
Boy, G. A., & Schmitt, K. (2012) · Annals of Nuclear Energy · doi:10.1016/j.anucene.2012.08.027 · Cited by 27
A Situational Perspective on Workarounds in IT-Enabled Business Processes: A Multiple Case Study
Röder, N., Wiesche, M., & Schermann, M. (2014) · Journal of the Association for Information Systems · Cited by 23
Metadata
- Authors
- Courtright, J. F., Acton, W. H., Frazier, M. L., & Lane, J. W.
- Affiliations
- The BDM Corporation Albuquerque, New Mexico
- Kirtland Air Force Base (US)
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1988-10
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 17
- Pages
- 1150-1153
- ISSN
- 0163-5182 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2409582227
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 2 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 0.65
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Ergonomics and Human Factors
- Keywords
- workarounds, design deficiencies, operational testing, problem prioritization, mission success
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
