Behavioural Science x Human Factors

“Yes, but what is it?!”

Mar 08, 2024

Welcome! In this post, I'm delving into the captivating world of Human Factors - a realm where psychology, design, and everyday life collide in fascinating ways.

A proper definition is: "Human factors refer to environmental, organisational and job factors, and human and individual characteristics, which influence behaviour at work in a way which can affect health and safety" (Health and Safety Executive: https://www.hse.gov.uk/humanfactors/introduction.htm ).

From the layout of your favourite app to the design of your office chair, Human Factors influences every aspect of our daily lives – even if we don’t recognise it. It's concerned with creating environments and systems that work seamlessly with human abilities and limitations.

Is it different to Ergonomics? This seems to be a hot topic, so I’m going to give the Chartered Institute of Ergonomics and Human Factors (CIEHF)’s wording on this one. “We take ergonomics and human factors to mean the same thing. One of the two terms may be used more in certain contexts or sectors. For example, 'ergonomics' tends to be used more in regard to offices and 'human factors' in the healthcare, defence and energy sectors.” (CIEHF: https://ergonomics.org.uk/learn/what-is-ergonomics.html).

What about UX – same diff? Again, it’s difficult to define as they run in the same circles but I’d say that UX is arguably a subset of Human Factors. There are many topics out there discussing this overlap and confusion (see links at end of article). But to contextualise this, so far in my post-grad course I’ve covered off topics like: risk, health and wellbeing, usability, attention, memory, and error – and arguably some but not all of these would come under the UX umbrella.

What about Behavioural Science? Behavioural Science is the study of human behaviour and the factors that influence it, such as psychology, sociology, economics, and others. While both Behavioural Science and Human Factors seek to understand human behaviour, they do so from slightly different perspectives. However, as ever there is considerable overlap between the two fields, and they often complement each other in research and practice.

I’m still working out how the pieces fit together. But like UX and Human Factors, my perspective so far – and I’m early into my Human Factors journey – is that Behavioural Science runs along similar lines but remains distinct, and both disciplines can offer valuable insights to the other.

For instance, I was recently talking to a client about a production issue, where they thought that mistakes might be happening because workers are distracted. I’m keeping this intentionally vague but knowing the scenario, and knowing it involved busy production line with lots of lights and bells and whistles, it was reasonable to think that distraction might influence people to make mistakes.

But it may not be the only thing. Luckily for the client, I’d recently been learning about DuPont’s ‘Dirty Dozen’ – an excellent name for a concept which describes 12 of the most common human error ‘preconditions’. This was originally developed by Gordon Dupont in 1993, and the original list was developed for aviation maintenance (Skybrary.aero: https://skybrary.aero/articles/human-factors-dirty-dozen)

These are:

1. Lack of communication

2. Complacency

3. Lack of knowledge

4. Distraction

5. Lack of teamwork

6. Fatigue

7. Lack of resources

8. Pressure

9. Lack of assertiveness

10. Stress

11. Lack of awareness

12. Norms

(List from IHF: https://www.ihf.co.uk/the-dirty-dozen/ - this resource also has useful information on what each of these factors look like)

Number 4 is Distraction – and we have an inkling that might be causing the production issues. But what about the other 11? I confess I probably wouldn’t have thought about some of them right away – and some of them, not at all. I can imagine that pre Dirty Dozen I’d have come thought about complacency, lack of teamwork, fatigue and pressure, given the client’s issue. But I don’t think I would have thought about stress or lack of assertiveness, for example.

The Dirty Dozen served as a handy shortcut in thinking for me. But more importantly, it made me think about new angles that I wouldn’t have. The Dirty Dozen comes from the world of Human Factors, not Behavioural Science, and I don’t think I’ve ever come across it in Behavioural Science. I may never have done. But learning about a new discipline has broadened my perspective, and helped me look at an old issue with fresh eyes.

Thanks for reading, and until next time,

Adele

Adele’s Substack

Discussion about this post

Ready for more?