Gary Klein
About the author:
No description available of Gary Klein...
Publications by Gary Klein (bibliography)
» 2008 «
Klein, Gary, Deal, Steven and Wiggins, Sterling (2008): Cognitive Systems Engineering: The Hype and the Hope. In IEEE Computer, 41 (3) pp. 95-97
» 2003 «
Jiang, James J., Klein, Gary, Tesch, Debbie B. and Chen, Hong-Gee (2003): Closing the user and provider service quality gap. In Communications of the ACM, 46 (2) pp. 72-76
» 2002 «
Klein, Gary, Jiang, James J. and Tesch, Debbie B. (2002): Wanted: project teams with a blend of is professional orientations. In Communications of the ACM, 45 (6) pp. 81-87
» 2001 «
Klein, Gary, Jiang, James J. and Sobol, Marion G. (2001): A new view of IS personnel performance evaluation. In Communications of the ACM, 44 (6) pp. 95-102
» 2000 «
Jiang, J. J. and Klein, Gary (2000): Side Effects of Decision Guidance in Decision Support Systems. In Interacting with Computers, 12 (5) pp. 469-481
“Ideal Decision Support Systems (DSS) provide aid in the attainment of a solution to a particular problem of the user. However, during system interaction, the dialogue design of the DSS has the potential to influence the outcome of the solution. This side effect may or may not be desirable, but system designers must be aware of the potential impact. A laboratory study described in this report examines the significance of the impact. A total of 46 subjects conducted decisions on forecasting methods under two different design structures for DSS interfaces. An increase in guidance provided by the system led to a significant change in the decision model selected. This change in model selected resulted in a number of different solutions to the study's forecasting problem. In application settings, such impacts need to be evaluated prior to implementation to avoid the situations where the software influences the decision process.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1997 «
Klein, Gary, Kaempf, George L., Wolf, Steve, Thorsden, Marvin and Miller, Thomas (1997): Applying Decision Requirements to User-Centered Design. In International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 46 (1) pp. 1-15
“The decision requirements of a task are the key decisions and how they are made. Most task analysis methods address the steps that have to be followed; decision requirements offer a complementary picture of the critical and difficult judgments and decisions needed to carry out the task. This article describes the use of Cognitive Task Analysis methods to identify decision requirements, as part of a project to improve the decision making of AEGIS cruiser officers in high-stress situations. We found that by identifying these requirements, and centering the system design process on them, we could develop storyboards for a human-computer interface that reflected the user's needs.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1995 «
Endsley, Mica R., Klein, Gary, Woods, David D., Smith, Philip J. and Selcon, Stephen J. (1995): Future Directions in Cognitive Engineering and Naturalistic Decision Making. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th Annual Meeting 1995. pp. 450-453.
“Cognitive Engineering and Naturalistic Decision Making are presented as two related fields of endeavor that seek to understand how people process information and perform within complex systems and to develop ways of applying this knowledge within the design and training process. This panel presents an overview of the current state of the art in this research domain and charts paths for needed developments in the field in the near future.”
Copyrights may apply
Klein, Gary (1995): The Value Added by Cognitive Task Analysis. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th Annual Meeting 1995. pp. 530-533.
“Cognitive Task Analysis (CTA) attempts to describe how people perform tasks: the cues and patterns they use, their inferences and strategies, mental models, and other related topics. It differs from behavioral task analyses that seek to enumerate the steps that must be followed without examining the expertise needed to perform critical steps. Therefore, CTA provides a more in-depth picture, which complements the broader and more comprehensive behavioral task analysis. A CTA usually consists of five steps: Preparation, Knowledge Elicitation, Data Analysis, Knowledge Representation, and Application. The applications of CTA can take a number of forms, such as training, system design, personnel selection, and market research.”
Copyrights may apply
Klein, Gary and Mosier, Kathy (1995): Applying the Naturalistic Decision-Making Perspective to Training. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th Annual Meeting 1995. p. 1248.
“One way to evaluate the Naturalistic Decision Making (NDM) framework is by its value in recommending and guiding training interventions. NDM researchers have shown that people do not use classical strategies, such as multiattribute utility analysis, in operational settings. A variety of NDM models have been proposed to explain how people actually do make decisions under conditions such as uncertainty and time pressure. Yet there is little purpose in training these strategies, since they describe what people already do. The challenge to NDM researchers is to build on these descriptions, and recommend training interventions that are practical and effective. The symposium presents the work of four NDM researchers engaged in developing training interventions. The paper by Klein describes a decision-centered training approach that has been used to embed process training in a curriculum for firefighters. The paper by Orasanu discusses strategies for improving the decision-making skills of commercial pilots. The paper by Mumaw and Roth addresses training of nuclear power plant operators to make better judgments and decisions during nonroutine events. The paper by Cohen describes the development of a training program to improve the situation awareness skills of Army officers.”
Copyrights may apply
Klein, Gary and Wolf, Steve (1995): Decision-Centered Training. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th Annual Meeting 1995. pp. 1249-1252.
“What can the Naturalistic Decision Making (NDM) perspective tell us about training people to make better decisions? The NDM framework offers four guidelines for training. (i) Build expertise, rather than teaching generic analytical strategies; (ii) Support, rather than replace, the strategies people use; (iii) Make the decision requirements specific to the task context; (iv) Model the cognitive processes of subject-matter experts. Training can be implemented using better scenarios and through cognitive modeling. A recent project is described, in which decision-centered training was used at the National Emergency Training Center to revise a set of course materials. The revisions emphasized opportunities to improve situation awareness skills through better specification of critical cues and patterns, and recommendations about using the debriefs following exercises to probe for cognitive processes underlying judgments and decisions.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1994 «
Moses, Franklin L., Salas, Ed, Cannon-Bowers, Janis A., Perez, Ray S., Roth, Emilie M., Mumaw, Randall J., Mirabella, Angelo, Cohen, Marvin S. and Klein, Gary (1994): Improved Training Methods: Research to Applications. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 38th Annual Meeting 1994. pp. 1150-1153.
“How to train people to make good decisions, solve problems, and so on depends, as does all training, on some form of practice and feedback. The question for behavioral research often is how to improve on these basic requirements. Six panelists describe and discuss their research and experience with the relationship among training and factors such as group dynamics, stress, mental models, and naturalistic requirements. This session includes interaction among the panel and the audience.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1993 «
Klein, Gary (1993): Sources of Error in Naturalistic Decision Making Tasks. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting 1993. pp. 368-371.
“There are several reasons to study decision errors. We can learn about reasoning processes from instances where they break down. We can also try to find ways to reduce the chances for decision errors. While there have been a number of excellent studies of naturally-occurring errors (e.g., Fitts & Jones, 1947; Norman, 1981; Rasmussen, 1982; Reason, 1990; Swain & Guttmann, 1983), these studies have examined the full range of human errors. The goal of my study was much more modest: to examine errors linked to faulty judgment, or inadequate problem solving or decision making, in order to gain a sense of why such errors would arise in field settings.”
Copyrights may apply
Moses, Franklin L., Alluisi, Earl A., Bell, Herbert, Sticha, Paul J., Mirabella, Angelo, Gawron, Valerie J. and Klein, Gary (1993): Issues in Providing Effective Training for Large Groups. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting 1993. pp. 1248-1251.
“The design of training for large groups or collectives demands a focus on group performance that differs from a mere aggregation of individual, crew, and smaller team performances. Emphasis on the training of large groups has broad military and non-military applicability, especially where success depends on complex interactions and multiple subgoals. Five panelists describe and discuss training system design factors and "lessons learned" as they relate to issues in training large groups. The session features a discussant with extensive experience in training research and development, and includes interactions between the discussant, the panel, and the audience.”
Copyrights may apply
» 1990 «
Catterall, Bernard J., Harker, Susan, Klein, Gary, Notess, Mark and Tang, John C. (1990): Group HCI Design: Problems and Prospects. In ACM SIGCHI Bulletin, 22 (2) pp. 37-41
“Design of human-computer interfaces is typically carried out by groups of designers rather than by isolated individuals. In this report, we characterize those groups and their contexts, examine the problems that such groups encounter, and evaluate the extent to which current HCI techniques address the needs of groups of designers.”
Copyrights may apply
SHOW THIS LIST ON YOUR HOMEPAGE
What do YOU think?
Give us your opinion! Do you have any comments/additions
that you would like other visitors to see?
You say:
Mar 22nd, 2010
Changes to this page (author)
15 Feb 2010: Enabled abstracts to be shown on Gary Klein's author page.17 Aug 2009: Author was edited 17 Aug 2009: Author was edited
17 Aug 2009: Author was edited
01 Jun 2009: Author was edited
27 Jun 2007: Author was edited
27 Jun 2007: Author was edited
27 Jun 2007: Author was edited
27 Jun 2007: Author was edited
26 Jun 2007: Author was edited
26 Jun 2007: Author was edited
26 Jun 2007: Author was edited
23 Jun 2007: Author was edited
28 Apr 2003: Added the author to the bibliography
