Advanced

Improving emergency response through cognitive task analysis

Borell, Jonas LU and Eriksson, Kerstin LU (2007) 14th TIEMS Annual Conference, 2007 In 14th TIEMS Annual Conference 2007 Book of Proceedings p.568-574
Abstract
Society has a responsibility to aid its citizens in case of emergency. This calls for planning

and preparations. However, societal emergency response activities are not always fully

effective. This might be due to suboptimal emergency planning and preparations, with some

planned response actions not working as intended. For example, it is possible that some

actions show to be ‘over-planned’ with too much content detail, while other actions show a

lack of adequate drill or information support. Each emergency has its own specific

characteristics, and good emergency response demands conscious thought processes for

guiding the interaction between the response and the dynamic course... (More)
Society has a responsibility to aid its citizens in case of emergency. This calls for planning

and preparations. However, societal emergency response activities are not always fully

effective. This might be due to suboptimal emergency planning and preparations, with some

planned response actions not working as intended. For example, it is possible that some

actions show to be ‘over-planned’ with too much content detail, while other actions show a

lack of adequate drill or information support. Each emergency has its own specific

characteristics, and good emergency response demands conscious thought processes for

guiding the interaction between the response and the dynamic course of events. Yet, some

response generated demands almost always arise during emergencies (Quarantelli, 1997), and

such demands should preferably be handled automatically. Thus there is a need for a mix of

conscious and automatic processes during emergency response. Conscious processing has the

ability to adapt to the present situation, but is relatively slow and confined to one thing at a

time. Automatic processes are relatively fast and can operate in parallel, but can not be

adapted to the situation. The question is which task belongs on which level. Rasmussen

(1983) described a model over different cognitive performance levels, linking control mode

(automatic vs. conscious) to situation (routine vs. novel problems). We believe that

Rasmussen’s ideas can be used throughout the emergency planning and response processes to

sort tasks in accordance with their probable optimal mental control modes. Based on a study

of emergency planning and response activities in the Swedish city of Malmö we propose and

discuss an algorithm for guiding the selection of appropriate competence types for different

tasks. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding
publication status
published
subject
keywords
planning, conscious processes, emergency response, training, automatic processes, task analysis
in
14th TIEMS Annual Conference 2007 Book of Proceedings
editor
Jones, Alan
pages
568 - 574
publisher
The International Emergency Management Society
conference name
14th TIEMS Annual Conference, 2007
project
FRIVA
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
4c73b34b-2604-45f9-989e-b9f410756ea1 (old id 600228)
date added to LUP
2007-11-16 22:19:34
date last changed
2016-07-06 14:43:23
@misc{4c73b34b-2604-45f9-989e-b9f410756ea1,
  abstract     = {Society has a responsibility to aid its citizens in case of emergency. This calls for planning<br/><br>
and preparations. However, societal emergency response activities are not always fully<br/><br>
effective. This might be due to suboptimal emergency planning and preparations, with some<br/><br>
planned response actions not working as intended. For example, it is possible that some<br/><br>
actions show to be ‘over-planned’ with too much content detail, while other actions show a<br/><br>
lack of adequate drill or information support. Each emergency has its own specific<br/><br>
characteristics, and good emergency response demands conscious thought processes for<br/><br>
guiding the interaction between the response and the dynamic course of events. Yet, some<br/><br>
response generated demands almost always arise during emergencies (Quarantelli, 1997), and<br/><br>
such demands should preferably be handled automatically. Thus there is a need for a mix of<br/><br>
conscious and automatic processes during emergency response. Conscious processing has the<br/><br>
ability to adapt to the present situation, but is relatively slow and confined to one thing at a<br/><br>
time. Automatic processes are relatively fast and can operate in parallel, but can not be<br/><br>
adapted to the situation. The question is which task belongs on which level. Rasmussen<br/><br>
(1983) described a model over different cognitive performance levels, linking control mode<br/><br>
(automatic vs. conscious) to situation (routine vs. novel problems). We believe that<br/><br>
Rasmussen’s ideas can be used throughout the emergency planning and response processes to<br/><br>
sort tasks in accordance with their probable optimal mental control modes. Based on a study<br/><br>
of emergency planning and response activities in the Swedish city of Malmö we propose and<br/><br>
discuss an algorithm for guiding the selection of appropriate competence types for different<br/><br>
tasks.},
  author       = {Borell, Jonas and Eriksson, Kerstin},
  editor       = {Jones, Alan},
  keyword      = {planning,conscious processes,emergency response,training,automatic processes,task analysis},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {568--574},
  publisher    = {ARRAY(0x9208240)},
  series       = {14th TIEMS Annual Conference 2007 Book of Proceedings},
  title        = {Improving emergency response through cognitive task analysis},
  year         = {2007},
}