IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/simgam/v52y2021i5p635-649.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Human Reliability Assessment of Marine Engineering Students through Engine Room Simulator Technology

Author

Listed:
  • Cagatay Kandemir, 
  • Metin Celik

Abstract

Background It is widely accepted that the simulators are important technological instruments which can be utilized as an effective assessment tool in various domains Developing technologies allow the functionality levels of simulators to increase behavioural realism. For this reason, students in higher educations are involved in various useful practices using simulators. Purpose In this respect, simulators can also provide great opportunities to conduct analysis through human error on which this study conceptualized. Model In this context, this study proposes a human error evaluation approach through simulator technology whilst taking advantage of the SOHRA (Shipboard Operation Human Reliability Analysis) method. As a case study, the proposed approach was applied to a simulator environment with the involvement of marine engineering students. Throughout this case, the students were challenged with various error producing conditions (EPCs) while their performances were observed. Results The attendees were achieved good practice when confronted with EPC23 (unreliable instruments), EPC17 (inadequate checking), and EPC5 (spatial & functional incompatibility). However, the points open for improvement are found on EPC2 (time shortage), EPC24 (absolute judgments required), EPC18 (objectives conflict) and EPC9 (technical unlearning). Conclusion This framework can be utilized in simulator-based training activities to increase operational awareness of marine engineering students. The recent developments in simulator technology can boost the effectiveness of the proposed framework.

Suggested Citation

  • Cagatay Kandemir,  & Metin Celik, 2021. "A Human Reliability Assessment of Marine Engineering Students through Engine Room Simulator Technology," Simulation & Gaming, , vol. 52(5), pages 635-649, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:52:y:2021:i:5:p:635-649
    DOI: 10.1177/10468781211013851
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10468781211013851
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/10468781211013851?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas L. Saaty, 1994. "How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 24(6), pages 19-43, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bhatta, Arun & Bigsby, Hugh R. & Cullen, Ross, 2011. "Alternative to Comprehensive Ecosystem Services Markets: The Contribution of Forest-Related Programs in New Zealand," 2011 Conference, August 25-26, 2011, Nelson, New Zealand 115350, New Zealand Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    2. Daniel Schatz & Rabih Bashroush, 0. "Economic valuation for information security investment: a systematic literature review," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    3. Sahar Validi & Arijit Bhattacharya & P. J. Byrne, 2020. "Sustainable distribution system design: a two-phase DoE-guided meta-heuristic solution approach for a three-echelon bi-objective AHP-integrated location-routing model," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 290(1), pages 191-222, July.
    4. Chandratilake, S.R. & Dias, W.P.S., 2013. "Sustainability rating systems for buildings: Comparisons and correlations," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 22-28.
    5. Certa, Antonella & Hopps, Fabrizio & Inghilleri, Roberta & La Fata, Concetta Manuela, 2017. "A Dempster-Shafer Theory-based approach to the Failure Mode, Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) under epistemic uncertainty: application to the propulsion system of a fishing vessel," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 159(C), pages 69-79.
    6. Bertomeu, M. & Romero, C., 2001. "Managing forest biodiversity: a zero-one goal programming approach," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 68(3), pages 197-213, June.
    7. Hyunjin Lim & Sunkuk Kim & Yonggu Kim & Seunghyun Son, 2021. "Relative Importance Analysis of Safety Climate Evaluation Factors Using Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-14, April.
    8. Ormerod, R.J., 2014. "Critical rationalism in practice: Strategies to manage subjectivity in OR investigations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(3), pages 784-797.
    9. Carayannis, Elias G. & Goletsis, Yorgos & Grigoroudis, Evangelos, 2018. "Composite innovation metrics: MCDA and the Quadruple Innovation Helix framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 4-17.
    10. Sunita Guru & Jitendra Nenavani & Vipul Patel & Nityesh Bhatt, 2020. "Ranking of perceived risks in online shopping," DECISION: Official Journal of the Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, Springer;Indian Institute of Management Calcutta, vol. 47(2), pages 137-152, June.
    11. Rimvydas Labanauskis & Aurelija Kasparavičiūtė & Vida Davidavičienė & Dovilė Deltuvienė, 2018. "Towards quality assurance of the study process using the Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Method," Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, VsI Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Center, vol. 6(2), pages 799-819, December.
    12. Yusuf Ersoy & Ali Tehci, 2023. "Relationship marketing orientation in healthcare organisations with the AHP method," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 33(1), pages 35-45.
    13. Ali Yalcin & Fikri Bulut, 2007. "Landslide susceptibility mapping using GIS and digital photogrammetric techniques: a case study from Ardesen (NE-Turkey)," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 41(1), pages 201-226, April.
    14. Dianfa Wu & Zhiping Yang & Ningling Wang & Chengzhou Li & Yongping Yang, 2018. "An Integrated Multi-Criteria Decision Making Model and AHP Weighting Uncertainty Analysis for Sustainability Assessment of Coal-Fired Power Units," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-27, May.
    15. Ormerod, Richard J. & Ulrich, Werner, 2013. "Operational research and ethics: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 228(2), pages 291-307.
    16. Mirza Sikalo & Almira Arnaut-Berilo & Adela Delalic, 2023. "A Combined AHP-PROMETHEE Approach for Portfolio Performance Comparison," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, March.
    17. Daji Ergu & Gang Kou, 2012. "Questionnaire design improvement and missing item scores estimation for rapid and efficient decision making," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 197(1), pages 5-23, August.
    18. Król-Badziak, Aleksandra & Kozyra, Jerzy & Matyka, Mariusz, 2020. "Efficiency Of Deep Fertilizer Placement In Maize In Terms Of Sustainable Development Criteria," Roczniki (Annals), Polish Association of Agricultural Economists and Agribusiness - Stowarzyszenie Ekonomistow Rolnictwa e Agrobiznesu (SERiA), vol. 2020(4).
    19. Hartvigsen, David, 2005. "Representing the strengths and directions of pairwise comparisons," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(2), pages 357-369, June.
    20. Joanna Jaroszewicz & Anna Majewska, 2021. "Group Spatial Preferences of Residential Locations—Simplified Method Based on Crowdsourced Spatial Data and MCDA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-24, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:simgam:v:52:y:2021:i:5:p:635-649. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.