Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
Simulators are used to practice in a safe setting before training in a safety-critical environment. Since the nature of situations encountered in high-risk domains is complex and dynamic, it is considered important for the simulation to resemble conditions of real world tasks. For this reason, simulation-based training is often discussed in terms of realism in relation to real world work practices. However, regardless of the realism of the simulator, there are always glitches in the perception of the simulation as a realistic work setting. In this study video-recorded data is used to explore these glitches between a simulation and the real world. The analysis is focused on maritime instructors’ use of body and talk to represent aspects of the real world missing in high-fidelity simulators. Moreover, the study explores the role of these representations in developing the students’ understanding of the ship’s movements in manoeuvring also in a simulator environment. Results show that instructions given in the simulator have the potential to facilitate students’ learning of the ship’s movements by using the body as an instructional resource. In the study, a combination of bodily conduct and instructive talk that are coupled towards the simulator, as well as aspects of an imagined real world, is used to address glitches in the simulator. The results contribute to a growing corpus of research, which show that realism in simulator-based training is an instructional achievement rather than a matter of technical fidelity of the simulator.
Bailey, N., Housley, W., & Belcher, P. (2006). Navigation, interaction and bridge team work. The Sociological Review. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-954X.2006.00617.x.
Barsan, E. (2004). Sea service equivalency for full mission simulators training. Maritime Transport and Navigation Journal, 1.
Beaubien, J. M., & Baker, D. P. (2004). The use of simulation for training teamwork skills in health care: how low can you go? Quality & Safety in Health Care. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2004.009845.
Dahlström, N., Dekker, S., van Winsen, R., & Nyce, J. (2009). Fidelity and validity of simulator training. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science. doi: 10.1080/14639220802368864.
Galliers, J., Wilson, S., & Fone, J. (2007). A method for determining information flow breakdown in clinical systems. International Journal of Medical Informatics. doi: 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2006.05.015.
Goodwin, C. (1981). Conversational organization: interaction between speakers and hearers. New York: Academic Press.
Goodwin, C. (1994). Professional vision. American Anthropologist. doi: 10.1525/aa.1994.96.3.02a00100.
Goodwin, C. (1995). Seeing in depth. Social Studies of Science. doi: 10.1177/030631295025002002.
Goodwin, C. (2000). Action and embodiment within situated human interaction. Journal of Pragmatics. doi: 10.1016/S0378-2166(99)00096-X.
Goodwin, C. (2003). The semiotic body in its environment. In J. Coupland & R. Gwyn (Eds.), Discourses of the body (pp. 19–42). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. CrossRef
Heath, C., Hindmarsh, J., & Luff, P. (2011). Video in qualitative research: analysing social interaction in everyday life. London: SAGE Publications Ltd..
Hindmarsh, J., Reynolds, P., & Dunne, S. (2011). Exhibiting understanding: the body in apprenticeship. Journal of Pragmatics. doi: 10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.008.
Hindmarsh, J., Hyland, L., & Banerjee, A. (2014). Work to make simulation work: ‘realism’, instructional correction and the body in training. Discourse Studies. doi: 10.1177/1461445613514670.
Hontvedt, M. (2015). Professional vision in simulated environments-examining professional maritime pilots'performance of work tasks in a full-mission ship simulator. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction. doi: 10.1016/j.lcsi.2015.07.003.
Hutchins, E. (1995). Cognition in the wild. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Hutchins, E. (2006). Imagining the cognitive life of things. In symposium " The Cognitive Life of Things: Recasting the boundaries of Mind". Organized at the McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, Cambridge University, April, 2006.
Hutchins, E. (2010). Enaction, imagination, and insight. In J. Stewart, O. Gapenne, & E. A. Di Paolo (Eds.), Enaction: toward a new paradigm for cognitive science (pp. 425–450). Cambridge: The MIT Press. CrossRef
Hutchins, E., & Nomura, S. (2011). Collaborative construction of multimodal utterances. In J. Streeck, C. Goodwin, & C. LeBaron (Eds.), Embodied interaction: language and body in the material world (pp. 29–43). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hutchins, E., & Palen, L. (1997). Constructing meaning from space, gesture, and speech. In L. B. Resnick, C. Pontecorvo, & R. Säljö (Eds.), Discourse, tools and reasoning (pp. 23–40). Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg. CrossRef
Lindblom, J. (2015). Embodied Social Cognition. Cognitive systems monographs (COSMOS). Berlin: Springer International Publishing Switzerland. CrossRef
Luff, P., Hindmarsh, J., & Heath, C. (2000). Introduction. In P. Luff, J. Hindmarsh, & C. Heath (Eds.), Workplace studies – recovering work practice and informing systems design (pp. 1–28). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossRef
Maran, N. J., & Glavin, R. (2003). Low-to high-fidelity simulation–a continuum of medical education? Medical Education. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.37.s1.9.x.
Novak, M. A., Wakefield, E. M., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2016). What makes a movement a gesture? Cognition. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.10.014.
Prison, J., Lützhöft, M., & Porathe, T. (2009). Ship sense-what is it and how does one get it?. In RINA Human Factors in Ship Design and Operation Conference.
Prison, J., Dahlman, J., & Lundh, M. (2013). Ship sense-striving for harmony in ship manoeuvring. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs. doi: 10.1007/s13437-013-0038-5.
Rystedt, H., & Sjöblom, B. (2012). Realism, authenticity, and learning in healthcare simulations: rules of relevance and irrelevance as interactive achievements. Instructional Science. doi: 10.1007/s11251-012-9213-x.
Williams, R. (2013). Cognitive anthropology: distributed cognition and gesture. In C. Müller, A. Cienki, & E. Fricke (Eds.), Body-language-communication (Vol. 1, pp. 240–257). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
- Representing and enacting movement: The body as an instructional resource in a simulator-based environment
- Springer US
Neuer Inhalt/© ITandMEDIA, Best Practices für die Mitarbeiter-Partizipation in der Produktentwicklung/© astrosystem | stock.adobe.com