The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Cognitive Task Analysis
Abstract
Cognitive task analysis is defined as the extension of traditional task analysis techniques to yield information about the knowledge, thought processes and goal structures that underlie observable task performance. Cognitive task analyses are conducted for a wide variety of purposes, including the design of computer systems to support human work, the development of training, and the development of tests to certify competence. As part of its Programme of Work, NATO Research Study Group 27 on Cognitive Task Analysis has undertaken the task of reviewing existing cognitive task analysis techniques. The Group concludes that few integrated methods exist, that little attention is being paid to the conditions under which methods are appropriate, and that often it is unclear how the products of cognitive task analysis should be used. RSG.27 has also organized a workshop with experts in the field of cognitive task analysis. The most important issues that were discussed during the workshop were: (1) the use of CTA in the design of new systems, (2) the question when to use what technique, and (3) the role of CTA in system design. RSG.27 emphasizes: (1) that is important for the CTA community to be able to empirically demonstrate the added value of a CTA; (2) it is critical for the success of CTA to be involved in the design process from the start to finish, and to establish clear links with methods that are used by other disciplines, and (3) recommends that more research effort be directed to the issue of the reliability of CTA techniques. (P)
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.
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
Cited by
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1 · Cited by 7,776
Conditions for intuitive expertise: A failure to disagree.
Kahneman, D., & Klein, G. (2009) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/a0016755 · Cited by 2,443
The science of training: a decade of progress
Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2001) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.471 · Cited by 1,703
The Science of Training and Development in Organizations: What Matters in Practice
Salas, E., Tannenbaum, S. I., Kraiger, K., & Smith-Jentsch, K. A. (2012) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100612436661 · Cited by 1,104
Cognitive and usability engineering methods for the evaluation of clinical information systems.
Kushniruk, A. W., & Patel, V. L. (2004) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.jbi.2004.01.003 · Cited by 760
Transactive Memory Systems in Organizations: Matching Tasks, Expertise, and People
Brandon, D. P., & Hollingshead, A. B. (2004) · Organization Science · doi:10.1287/orsc.1040.0069 · Cited by 553
Health information technology: fallacies and sober realities
Karsh, B.-T., Weinger, M. B., Abbott, P. A., & Wears, R. L. (2010) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1136/jamia.2010.005637 · Cited by 365
GRAY, W. (2004) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1016/s0364-0213(04)00005-9 · Cited by 321
The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Engineering
(2013) · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199757183.001.0001 · Cited by 213
Primary Care Physicians’ Use of an Electronic Medical Record System: A Cognitive Task Analysis
Shachak, A., Hadas-Dayagi, M., Ziv, A., & Reis, S. (2009) · Journal of General Internal Medicine · doi:10.1007/s11606-008-0892-6 · Cited by 188
A guide to conducting a task analysis of psychotherapeutic change
Greenberg, L. S. (2007) · Psychotherapy Research · doi:10.1080/10503300600720390 · Cited by 185
A framework for analyzing the cognitive complexity of computer-assisted clinical ordering
Horsky, J., Kaufman, D. R., Oppenheim, M. I., & Patel, V. L. (2003) · Journal of Biomedical Informatics · doi:10.1016/s1532-0464(03)00062-5 · Cited by 137
Emerging themes in distance learning research and practice: some food for thought
Salas, E., Kosarzycki, M. P., Burke, C. S., Fiore, S. M., & Stone, D. L. (2002) · International Journal of Management Reviews · doi:10.1111/1468-2370.00081 · Cited by 128
Analysing adaptive scaffolds that help students develop self‐regulated learning behaviours
Munshi, A., Biswas, G., Baker, R., Ocumpaugh, J., Hutt, S., & Paquette, L. (2023) · Journal of Computer Assisted Learning · doi:10.1111/jcal.12761 · Cited by 88
Design and Evaluation of Explainable BDI Agents
Harbers, M., van den Bosch, K., & Meyer, J.-J. (2010) · 2010 IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology · doi:10.1109/wi-iat.2010.115 · Cited by 70
Optimizing the number of steps in learning tasks for complex skills
Nadolski, R. J., Kirschner, P. A., & Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2005) · British Journal of Educational Psychology · doi:10.1348/000709904x22403 · Cited by 70
Provider management strategies of abnormal test result alerts: a cognitive task analysis
Hysong, S. J., Sawhney, M. K., Wilson, L., Sittig, D. F., Espadas, D., Davis, T., & Singh, H. (2010) · Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association · doi:10.1197/jamia.m3200 · Cited by 65
Human-Machine Student Model Discovery and Improvement Using DataShop
Stamper, J. C., & Koedinger, K. R. (2011) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-21869-9_46 · Cited by 58
Insolvent: How to Reorient Computing for Just Sustainability
Becker, C. (2023) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/14668.001.0001 · Cited by 56
Rau, M. A., Aleven, V., Rummel, N., & Rohrbach, S. (2013) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/2470654.2470670 · Cited by 21
LLM-as-a-Judge for Software Engineering: Literature Review, Vision, and the Road Ahead
He, J., Shi, J., Zhuo, T. Y., Treude, C., Sun, J., Du, X., Xing, Z., & Lo, D. (2026) · ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology · doi:10.1145/3797276 · Cited by 12
The Value of Disagreement in AI Design, Evaluation, and Alignment
Fazelpour, S., & Fleisher, W. (2025) · Proceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency · doi:10.1145/3715275.3732146 · Cited by 10
Piech, C., Spencer, J., Huang, J., Ganguli, S., Sahami, M., Guibas, L., & Sohl-Dickstein, J. (2015) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1506.05908
Metadata
- Venue
- Psychology Press eBooks
- Publisher
- Psychology Press
- Published
- 2000-06-01
- OpenAlex
- W1792756357
- Cited by
- 915
- References
- 0
- Type
- reference entry
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
