PubMed Health⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 10661689

Control error statistics.

J R Buck·S M Zellers·M E Opar
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Control in general, and manual control in particular, are traditional topics in ergonomics. Numerous studies on these topics have focused on vehicular control or tracking, as experimenters have attempted to describe control performance in terms of control errors, typically using the 'root-mean-square' (RMS) error. The authors of this study believe that this and related statistics are not well understood by the ergonomics community and that additional or alternative performance measurements would be more appropriate as measurements of the particular criteria of concern. Accordingly, this paper shows some background of the RMS and similar statistics of control error, some new statistics, and their interrelationships. This development is intended as a guide to selection of criteria for use in tracking and manual control and their measurement.

Explore related subjects

Automobile DrivingErgonomicsHumansStatistics as TopicJournal Article

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

J R Buck, S M Zellers, M E Opar. 2000. Control error statistics.. https://doi.org/10.1080/001401300184620

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2000

Reliability of Snellen charts for testing visual acuity for driving: prospective study and postal questionnaire.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the ability of patients with binocular 6/9 or 6/12 vision on the Snellen chart (Snellen acuity) to read a number plate at 20.5 m (the required standard for driving) and to determine how health professionals advise such patients about driving. DESIGN: Prospective study of patients and postal questionnaire to healthcare professionals. SUBJECTS: 50 patients with 6/9 vision and 50 with 6/12 vision and 100 general practitioners, 100 optometrists or opticians, and 100 ophthalmologists. SETTING: Ophthalmology outpatient clinics in Sheffield. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Ability to read a number plate at 20.5 m and health professionals' advice about driving on the basis of visual acuity. RESULTS: 26% of patients with 6/9 vision failed the number plate test, and 34% with 6/12 vision passed it. Of the general practitioners advising patients with 6/9 vision, 76% said the patients could drive, 13% said they should not drive, and 11% were unsure. Of the general practitioners advising patients with 6/12 vision, 21% said the patients could drive, 54% said they should not drive, and 25% were unsure. The level of acuity at which optometrists, opticians, and ophthalmologists would advise drivers against driving ranged from 6/9(-2) (ability to read all except two letters on the 6/9 line of the Snellen chart) to less than 6/18. CONCLUSIONS: Snellen acuity is a poor predictor of an individual's ability to meet the required visual standard for driving. Patients with 6/9 vision or less should be warned that they may fail to meet this standard, but those with 6/12 vision should not be assumed to be below the standard.

Automobile Driving↗