By the same authors

How external and internal resources influence user action: the case of infusion devices

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard

How external and internal resources influence user action: the case of infusion devices. / Iacovides, Ioanna; Blandford, Ann; Cox, Anna L.; Back, Jonathan.

In: Cognition, Tehcnology & Work, Vol. 18, No. 4, 01.11.2016, p. 793-805.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Harvard

Iacovides, I, Blandford, A, Cox, AL & Back, J 2016, 'How external and internal resources influence user action: the case of infusion devices', Cognition, Tehcnology & Work, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 793-805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-016-0392-0

APA

Iacovides, I., Blandford, A., Cox, A. L., & Back, J. (2016). How external and internal resources influence user action: the case of infusion devices. Cognition, Tehcnology & Work, 18(4), 793-805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-016-0392-0

Vancouver

Iacovides I, Blandford A, Cox AL, Back J. How external and internal resources influence user action: the case of infusion devices. Cognition, Tehcnology & Work. 2016 Nov 1;18(4):793-805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-016-0392-0

Author

Iacovides, Ioanna ; Blandford, Ann ; Cox, Anna L. ; Back, Jonathan. / How external and internal resources influence user action: the case of infusion devices. In: Cognition, Tehcnology & Work. 2016 ; Vol. 18, No. 4. pp. 793-805.

Bibtex - Download

@article{d10d99c861764c6cb190922b04caa27c,
title = "How external and internal resources influence user action: the case of infusion devices",
abstract = "Human error can have potentially devastating consequences in contexts such as healthcare, but there is a rarely a simple dichotomy between errors and correct behaviour. Furthermore, there has been little consideration of how the activities of users (erroneous and otherwise) relate to the conceptual fit between user and device, despite the fact that healthcare technologies are becoming increasingly prevalent and complex. In this article, we present a study in which nurses? conceptions of infusion device practice were elicited to identify misfits. By focusing on key concepts that users work with when setting up infusions and the extent to which the system supports them, our analysis highlights how actions are influenced by the different resources available to users including: the device itself; supporting artefacts; the conceptual understanding of the user; and the community of practice the user is part of. The findings reveal the ways in which users are resourceful in their day-to-day activities and also suggest potential vulnerabilities within the wider system that could threaten patient safety. Our approach is able to make previously under-explored aspects of practice visible, thus enabling insight into how users act and why.",
keywords = "human error, conceptual fit, healthcare, qualitative research",
author = "Ioanna Iacovides and Ann Blandford and Cox, {Anna L.} and Jonathan Back",
year = "2016",
month = nov,
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/s10111-016-0392-0",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "793--805",
journal = "Cognition, Tehcnology & Work",
issn = "1435-5558",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "4",

}

RIS (suitable for import to EndNote) - Download

TY - JOUR

T1 - How external and internal resources influence user action: the case of infusion devices

AU - Iacovides, Ioanna

AU - Blandford, Ann

AU - Cox, Anna L.

AU - Back, Jonathan

PY - 2016/11/1

Y1 - 2016/11/1

N2 - Human error can have potentially devastating consequences in contexts such as healthcare, but there is a rarely a simple dichotomy between errors and correct behaviour. Furthermore, there has been little consideration of how the activities of users (erroneous and otherwise) relate to the conceptual fit between user and device, despite the fact that healthcare technologies are becoming increasingly prevalent and complex. In this article, we present a study in which nurses? conceptions of infusion device practice were elicited to identify misfits. By focusing on key concepts that users work with when setting up infusions and the extent to which the system supports them, our analysis highlights how actions are influenced by the different resources available to users including: the device itself; supporting artefacts; the conceptual understanding of the user; and the community of practice the user is part of. The findings reveal the ways in which users are resourceful in their day-to-day activities and also suggest potential vulnerabilities within the wider system that could threaten patient safety. Our approach is able to make previously under-explored aspects of practice visible, thus enabling insight into how users act and why.

AB - Human error can have potentially devastating consequences in contexts such as healthcare, but there is a rarely a simple dichotomy between errors and correct behaviour. Furthermore, there has been little consideration of how the activities of users (erroneous and otherwise) relate to the conceptual fit between user and device, despite the fact that healthcare technologies are becoming increasingly prevalent and complex. In this article, we present a study in which nurses? conceptions of infusion device practice were elicited to identify misfits. By focusing on key concepts that users work with when setting up infusions and the extent to which the system supports them, our analysis highlights how actions are influenced by the different resources available to users including: the device itself; supporting artefacts; the conceptual understanding of the user; and the community of practice the user is part of. The findings reveal the ways in which users are resourceful in their day-to-day activities and also suggest potential vulnerabilities within the wider system that could threaten patient safety. Our approach is able to make previously under-explored aspects of practice visible, thus enabling insight into how users act and why.

KW - human error

KW - conceptual fit

KW - healthcare

KW - qualitative research

U2 - 10.1007/s10111-016-0392-0

DO - 10.1007/s10111-016-0392-0

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 793

EP - 805

JO - Cognition, Tehcnology & Work

JF - Cognition, Tehcnology & Work

SN - 1435-5558

IS - 4

ER -