Abstract
Preamble. The study of human–machine systems or joint cognitive systems has traditionally tried to describe and model what the system—and therefore also the humans—should do. When systems performance differed from design specifications, it was explained as a failure of either the technology or of the humans. While this approach might be reasonable for systems that can be completely specified, it is not reasonable for systems that are underspecified. Since this latter category includes most of the socio-technical systems we have to deal with in today’s world, a different approach is required. Instead of looking at joint system performance as either right or wrong, it should recognise that coping with complexity means that performance necessarily must be variable in order to compensate for the underspecification of work and activities. Models and methods must therefore be able account for that.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer-Verlag Italia Srl
About this paper
Cite this paper
Hollnagel, E. (2011). The Human in Control: Modelling What Goes Right Versus Modelling What Goes Wrong. In: Cacciabue, P., Hjälmdahl, M., Luedtke, A., Riccioli, C. (eds) Human Modelling in Assisted Transportation. Springer, Milano. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1821-1_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-1821-1_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Milano
Print ISBN: 978-88-470-1820-4
Online ISBN: 978-88-470-1821-1
eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)