(54.236.58.220) 您好!臺灣時間:2021/02/28 09:16
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果

詳目顯示:::

我願授權國圖
: 
twitterline
研究生:張書瑀
研究生(外文):Shu-Yu Chang
論文名稱:國人在個人和團隊抬舉中大小重量錯覺之人因研究
論文名稱(外文):Ergonomic Study on the Size-Weight Illusion in Individual and Team Lifting for Chinese Subjects
指導教授:吳水丕吳水丕引用關係
指導教授(外文):Swei-Pi Wu
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:華梵大學
系所名稱:工業工程與經營資訊學系碩士班
學門:工程學門
學類:工業工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2008
畢業學年度:96
語文別:中文
論文頁數:127
中文關鍵詞:人工物料搬運單人抬舉團隊抬舉大小/重量錯覺心理物理學法
外文關鍵詞:manual material handlingindividual liftingteam liftingsize-weight illusionpsychophysics
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:4
  • 點閱點閱:328
  • 評分評分:系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔系統版面圖檔
  • 下載下載:0
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:0
人工物料搬運所造成之下背痛以及肌肉骨骼的傷害已被確認為是造成產業損失的主要來源之ㄧ。國外研究顯示,在相同質量下,較大的目標物感覺上比較小的目標物來的輕(此種現象稱為大小/重量錯覺)。此種較大的箱子伴隨著重量知覺的減少極可能導致抬舉者搬運過重的負荷,而造成肌肉骨骼系統的傷害。有鑑於國內缺乏有關容器的大小/重量錯覺效應之研究,再加上國內外亦缺乏心物法之證實。本研究乃以實驗性研究來探討國人在個人及雙人抬舉中之大小/重量錯覺,並以心物法來檢定MAWL是否受到大小/重量錯覺之效應。
首先,本研究共徵募28位受試者(18位男性及10位女性)進行個人(實驗一)及雙人(實驗二)抬舉作業,以探討在不同目標物大小(103、143及183立方英吋)及質量(3.0 kg、6.6 kg及13.8 kg)下相對於標準刺激(163立方英吋,9.0 kg)之重量知覺、體積知覺和施力知覺,研究結果發現質量對於重量知覺有顯著效應,但對於體積知覺和施力知覺則無顯著效應;而目標物大小對於重量知覺、體積知覺和施力知覺皆有顯著效應,顯示大小/重量錯覺存在於國人之個人及雙人抬舉中,當重量相同時重量知覺會隨著箱子目標物大小的增加而減少;單人抬舉時目標物大小從103立方英吋增加至183立方英吋時,其重量知覺下降20 %;雙人則為26 %。此外,性別及國內外不同種族之間對於重量知覺則皆無顯著的差異。
其次,本研究再針對上述受試者利用心物法來檢定單人(實驗三)及雙人(實驗四)抬舉時,在各種目標物大小(103、143及183立方英吋)和頻率(一次最大、1 lift/min和4 lifts/min)下其所決定之MAWL是否受到大小/重量錯覺的效應。研究結果顯示受試者會因為較大的箱子感覺較輕而搬運更用力,單人抬舉時,MAWL之下降百分比(以箱子最小者為基礎分別為100、95和76 %)大於NIOSH (1991)之修正乘數(分別為100、87和73 %);雙人抬舉時,MAWL之下降百分比(分別為100、110和108 %)亦大於NIOSH (1991)之修正乘數(分別為100、96和87 %)。顯示大小/重量錯覺對MAWL有所影響。
Manual materials handling (MMH) has been identified as one of the major causes of back injuries and musculoskeletal disorders to industrial workers and cost to industry. Foreign researches showed that the lifters perceive larger objects to be lighter than smaller objects of the same mass. This phenomenon is commonly known as the size-weight illusion. The decrease in perceived heaviness accompanying larger objects could lead the lifter to exceed the limits of safety and cause the musculoskeletal injuries. However, until now this size-weight illusion has not been studied in our country. In addition, this phenomenon also has not been verified by psychophysical research for foreign and native researchers. Therefore, the purposes of this study is to investigate the size-weight illusion of individuals and team lifting and to evaluate the effect of size-weight illusion on psychophysically determination of maximum acceptable weights (MAWL).
The first, this study recruited twenty-eight subjects (18 men, 10 women) to conduct individual (experiment 1) and team (experiment 2) lifting, and to investigate the perceived heaviness, perceived volume, and perceived exertion of the different combinations of object size (103, 143 and 183 cubic inches) and mass (3.0, 6.6 and 9.0 kg). The mass affects significantly on the perceived heaviness, however, couldn’t affect significantly on the perceived volume and perceived exertion. The effects of the object size on the perceived heaviness, perceived volume, and perceived exertion is significant. The result showed that the size-weight illusion exists in the individual and team lifting for Chinese participants. As the volume of the stimuli increased from 103 to 183 cubic inches, the reports of perceived heaviness decreased 20 % and 26 % for individual and team lifting, respectively. In addition, the effects of sex and ethnic difference were not significant.
The second, this study used psychophysical method and the same subjects to evaluate the effect of size-weight illusion on the MAWLs of different combinations of object size (103, 143 and 183 cubic inches) and frequency (one time maximum, 1 lift/min and 4 lifts/min) for individual (experiment 3) and team (experiment 4) lifting. The results showed that whether lifted by an individual or a team, larger containers are perceived to be substantially lighter than smaller containers, and the subjects lift more hardly accompany with an increase of volume. For individual lifting, the decrease of the MAWLs (100, 95 and 76 % relative to small containers) is larger than the revised horizontal and coupling multiplier of NIOSH (1991) (100, 87 and 73 % relative to small containers). For team lifting, the decrease of the MAWLs (100, 110 and 108 relative to small containers) is also larger than the revised horizontal and coupling multipliers of NIOSH (1991) (100, 96 and 87 % relative to small containers). This indicated that the effect of size-weight illusion on the MAWL is significant.
摘要…………………………………………………………………… I
目錄…………………………………………………………………… II
圖目錄………………………………………………………………… IV
表目錄………………………………………………………………… V
第一章 導論
第一節 研究背景 …………………………………………………… 1
第二節 研究動機 …………………………………………………… 3
第三節 研究目的 …………………………………………………… 3
第四節 研究流程 …………………………………………………… 4
第二章 文獻探討
第一節 引言 ………………………………………………………… 7
第二節 重量知覺與大小/重量錯覺………………………………… 7
第三節 在工業抬舉作業中的大小/重量錯覺……………………… 10
第四節 容器大小對於心物法MAWL之效應……………………… 11
第三章 單人及雙人抬舉作業之大小/重量錯覺研究
第一節 研究方法 …………………………………………………… 15
第二節 結果 ………………………………………………………… 22
第三節 討論 ………………………………………………………… 36
第四章 以心物法驗證單人及雙人抬舉作業中大小/重量錯覺的效應
第一節 研究方法 …………………………………………………… 55
第二節 結果 ………………………………………………………… 61
第三節 討論 ………………………………………………………… 76
第五章 結論與建議
第一節 結論 ………………………………………………………… 99
第二節 建議 ………………………………………………………… 103
參考文獻……………………………………………………………… 104
附錄
附錄一 結果資料表………………………………………………… 110
附錄二 實驗指示語………………………………………………… 111
1.吳水丕,1998,國人男性最大可承受提攜重量之研究,行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告,NSC87-2213-E-211-002。
2.吳水丕,1999,國人女性最大可承受提攜重量之研究,行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫成果報告,NSC88-2213-E-211-001。
3.吳水丕,林祺軒,2005,國人男性雙人物料提舉能力之研究,技術學刊,20(2),175-183。
4.吳水丕,林祺軒,2005,國人女性雙人物料提舉能力之研究,勞工安全衛生研究季刊,13(4),274-282。
5.Aberg, U., Elgstrand, E., Magnus, P. and Lindholm, A., 1968, “Analysis of components and prediction of energy expenditure in manual tasks”, Internatonal Journal of Production Research, 6, 189-196.
6.Amazeen, E. L., and Turvey, M. T., 1996, “Weight perception and the haptic size-weight illusion are functions of the inertia tensor”, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 22, 213-232.
7.Amazeen, E. L., 1997, “The effects of volume on perceived heavi¬ness by dynamic touch: With and without vision”, Ecological Psychology, 9, 245-263.
8.Amazeen, E. L., 1999, “Perceptual independence of size and weight by dynamic touch.”, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 25, 102-119.
9.Amazeen, E. L. and Jarrett, V. D., 2003, “The role of rotational inertia in the haptic and haptic + visual size-weight illusions”, Ecological Psychology, 15, 317-333.
10.Ayoub, M. M., Mital, A., Bakken, G. M., Asfour, S. S. and Bathea, N. J., 1980, “Development of strength and capacities norms for manual materials handling activities: The state of the art”, Hu¬man Factors, 22, 271-283.
11.Bingham, G. P., Schmidt, R. C. and Rosenblum, L. D., 1989, “Hefting for a maximum distance throw: A smart perceptual mechanism”, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 507-528.
12.Birnbaum, M. H. and Veit, C. T., 1974, “Scale-free tests of an additive model for the size-weight illusion”, Perception and Psychophysics, 16(2), 276-282.
13.Borg, G., 1962, “Physical performance and perceived exertion”, Studia Psychologica et Paedagogica, Series altera, Investigationes XI, Lund, Gleerups.
14.Brown, J. R., 1973, “Lifting as an industrial hazard”, American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 34, 292-297.
15.Chaffin, D. B., 1969, “A computerized biomechanical model-development of and use in studying gross body actions”, Journal of Biomechanics, 2, 429-441.
16.Chaffin, D. B., 1973, “A longitudinal study of low-back pain as associated with occupational weight lifting factors”, American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 513-525.
17.Charpentier, A., 1891, “Analyse experimentale de quelques ele¬ments de la sensation de poids [Experimental study of some aspects of weight perception]”, Archives de Physiologie Normales et Pathologiques, 3, 122-135.
18.Ciriello, V. M. and Snook, S. H., 1983, “A study of size, distance, height, and frequency effects on manual handling tasks”, Human Factors, 25,473-483.
19.Ciriello, V. M., Snook, S. H., Blick, A. C. and Wilkinson, P. L., 1990, “The effects of tasks duration on psychophysically-determined maximum acceptable weight and forces”, Ergonomics, 33(2), 187-200.
20.Ciriello, V. M, Snook. S. H. and Hughes, G. J., 1993, “Further studies of psychophysical determined maximum weights and forces”, Human Factors, 55, 175-186.
21.Ciriello, V. M. and Snook, S. H., 1999, “Survey of manual handling tasks”, International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 25, 149-156.
22.Coren, S., Ward, L. M. and Enns, J. T., 2004, Sensation and per¬ception. Hoboken, N: Wiley.
23.Davis, C. M., 1973, “Mechanical advantage in the size-weight illusion”, Perception and Psychophysics, 13, 238-240.
24.Devis, C. M., 1974, “The role of effective lever length in the perception of lifted weights”, Perception and Psychophysics, 16, 67-69.
25.Davis, P. R., 1985, “The commission of the European communities seminar on the prevention of lumbar disorders at work, Introduction to Special issue: Industrial Back Pain in Europe”, Ergonomics, 28, 1-2.
26.Dennis, G. J. and Barrett, R. S., 2002, “Spinal loads during individual and team lifting”, Ergonomics, 45, 671-681.
27.Dresslar, F. B., 1894, “Studies in the psychology of touch”, Ameri¬can Journal of Psychology, 6, 313-368.
28.Drury, C. G., 1983, “Hand placement in manual material handling”, Human Factors, 25(5), 551-562.
29.Ellis, R. R. and Lederman, S. J., 1993, “The role of haptic vs. visual volume cues in the size-weight illusion”, Perception and Psycho-physics, 55, 315-324.
30.Flanagan, J. R. and Beltzner, M. A., 2000, “Independence of perceptual and sensorimotor predictions in the size-weight illusion”, Nature Neuroscience, 3(7), 737-741.
31.Flournoy, T., 1894, “De Iinfluence de la perception visuelle des corps sur leur poids apparent [The influence of visual perception on the apparent weight of objects]”, L'Annee Psychologique, 1, 198-208.
32.Garg, A. and Saxena, U., 1980, “Container characteristics and maxi¬mum acceptable weight of lift”, Human Factors, 22,487-495.
33.Garg, A. and Badger, D., 1986, “Maximum acceptable weight and maximum voluntary isometric strength for asymmetric lifting”, Ergonomics, 29, 879-892.
34.Genaidy, A. M., Karwowski, W., Christensen, D. M., Vogiatzis, C, Deraiseh, N. and Prins, A., 1998, “What is "heavy"?”, Ergonomics, 41,420-432.
35.Jager, M. and Luttmann, A., 1986, “Biomechanisches model calculations of spinal stress for different working postures in various workload situation, In the Ergonomics of Working Postures”, Models, Methods and Cases (Taylor and Francis, London), 144-154.
36.Jager, M., 1987, Biomechanisches model des menschen zur analyse und beurteilung der belastung der wirbelsaule bei der handhabung von lasten (Fortschritt-Berichte VDI, Reihe 17, Nr. 33)(VDI Verlag, Dusseldorf).
37.Jiang, B. C., Smith, J. L. and Ayoub, M. M., 1986, “Psychophysical modeling for combined materials handling activities”, Ergonomics, 29, 1173-1190.
38.Jones, L. A., 1986, “Perception of force and weight: Theory and research”, Psychological Bulletin, 100, 29-42.
39.Karwowski, W. and Mital, A., 1986, “Isometric and isokinetic testing of lifting strength of males in teamwork”, Ergonomics, 29, 869-878.
40.Karwowski, W., 1988, “Maximum load lifting capacity of males and females in teamwork”, In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 32nd Annual Meeting (pp. 680-682). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
41.Karwowski, W. and Pongpatanasuegsa, N., 1988, “Testing of isomet¬ric and isokinetic lifting strengths of untrained females in team¬work”, Ergonomics, 51, 291-301.
42.Karwowski, W., Shumate, C., Yates, J. W. and Pongpatana, N., 1992, “Discriminability of load heaviness: implications for the psychophysical approach to manual lifting”, Ergonomics, 35(7/8), 729-744.
43.Karwowski, W., Lee, W., Jamaldin, B., Gaddie, P., Jang, R. and Alqesaimi, K. K., 1999, “Beyond psychophysics: The need for a cognitive engineering approach to setting limits in manual lifting tasks”, Ergonomics, 42, 40-60.
44.Kloos, H. and Amazeen, E. L., 2002, “Perceiving heaviness by dy¬namic touch: An investigation of the size-weight illusion in preschoolers”, British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 171-183.
45.Koseleff, P., 1957, “Studies in the perception of heaviness: Some relevant facts concerning the size-weight-effect (SWE)”, Acta Psychologica, 13, 242-252.
46.Kumar, S., 1980, “Physiological responses to weight lifting in different planes”, Ergonomics, 23, 987-993.
47.Laurig, W., 1986, “Simulation des manuellen Stuckgutumschlages Zur Ermittlung der Personalkapazitat”, Fordertechnik, 55 (7/8), 24-26.
48.Legg, S. J. and Myles, W. S., 1985, “Metabolic and cardiovascular cost, and perceived effort over an 8 hour day when lifting loads selected by the psychophysical method”, Ergonomics, 28, 337-347
49.Luczak, H. and Ge, S., 1989, “Fuzzy modeling of relations between physical weight and perceived heaviness: The effect of size-weight illusion in industrial lifting tasks”, Ergonomics, 32, 823-837.
50.Masin, S. C. and Crestoni, L., 1988, “Experimental demonstration of the sensory basis of the size-weight illusion”, Perception and Psychophysics, 44, 309-312.
51.Marras, W. S., Davis, K. G., Kirking, B. C. and Granata, K. P., 1999, “Spine loading and trunk kinematics during team lifting”, Ergnomics,42, 1258-1273.
52.Mital, A. and Okolie, S. T., 1982 “Influence of Container Shape, Partitions, Frequency, Distance and Height Level on the Maximum Acceptable Amount of Liquid Carried by Males”, American Industrial Hygiene Association Journal, 43, 813-819.
53.Mital, A. and Manivasagan, I., 1983, “Subjective Estimates of One-Handed Carrying Tasks”, Applied Ergonomics, 14, 265-269.
54.Masin, S. C. and Crestoni, L., 1988, “Experimental demonstration of the sensory basis of the size-weight illusion” Perception and Psychophysics, 44, 309-312.
55.Mital, A. and Fard, H. F., 1986, “Psychophysical and physiological responses to lifting symmetrical and asymmetrical loads sym¬metrically and asymmetrically”, Ergonomics, 29, 1263-1272.
56.Naylor, Y. K. and Amazeen, E. L., 2004, “The Size-Weight Illusion in Team Lifting”, Human Factors, 46(2), 349-356.
57.Pick, H. L. and Pick, A. D., 1967, “A developmental and analytic study of the size-weight illusion”, Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 5,362-371.
58.Potvin, J. R. and Bent, L. R., 1997, “NIOSH equation horizontal distances associated with the Liberty Mutual (Snook) lifting table box widths”, Ergonomics, 40, 650-655.
59.Rice, V. J., Sharp, M. A., Nindle, B. C. and Bills, R. K., 1995, “Pre¬diction of two-person team lifting capacity”, In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th Annual Meeting (pp. 645-649). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergo¬nomics Society.
60.Robinson, H. B., 1964, “An experimental examination of the size-weight illusion in young children”, Child Development, 55, 91-107.
61.Rohmert, W., 1977, “Korperkrafte In Taschenbuch der Arbeitsgestaltung- Grundlagen und Anwendung arbeitswissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse”, Koln, Bachem, 51-59.
62.Rohmert, W., 1983, “Rationelle Arbeit In W. Rohmert and J. Rutenfranz (eds.) Praktische Arbeitsphysiolgie”, Thieme, Stuttgart, 176-226.
63.Rohmert, W., Mainzer, J. and Kanz, M., 1988a, “Individuelle der Vektogrmme von isometrischen Stellungskraften”, Zeitschrift fur Arbeitswissenschaft, 42 (2), 102-105.
64.Rohmert, W., Samuelson, B., Helbig, C. and Wos, H., 1988b, “Untersuchungen zur maximalen Ausdauer and Erholungszeit bei statischer Muskelarbeit und unterschiedlichen Korperhaltungen”, Zeitschrift fur Arbeitswissenschaft, 42(2), 113-115.
65.Rohmert, W., Wangenheim, H., Mainzer, J., Zipp, P. and Lesser, W., 1986, “A study stressing the need for a static postural force model for work analysis”, Ergonomics, 29, 1235-1249.
66.Sharp, M. A., Rice, V. J., Nindle, B. C. and Mello, P., 1995, “Maxi¬mum acceptable load for lifting and carrying in two-person teams”. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th Annual Meeting (pp. 640-644). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
67.Snook, S. H., 1978, “The design of manual handling tasks”, Ergo¬nomics, 21, 963-985.
68.Snook, S. H. and Ciriello, V. M., 1991, “The design of manual han¬dling tasks: Revised tables of maximum acceptable weights and forces”, Ergonomics, 34, 1197-1213.
69.Stevens, J. C. and Rubin, L. L., 1970, “Psychophysical scales of appar¬ent heaviness and the size-weight illusion”, Perception and Psy¬chophysics, 8,225-230.
70.Turvey, M. T., Shockley, K. and Carello, C., 1999, “Affordance, prop¬er function, and the physical basis of perceived heaviness”, Cognition, 73, B17-B26.
71.Wu, S. P., 1997, “Maximum acceptable weight of lift by Chinese experienced male manual handlers”, Applied Ergonomics, 8(4), 237-244.
72.Wu, S. P. and Chen, C. C., 2001, “Psychophysical determination of carrying capacity for a 1-h work period by Chinese males”, Ergonomics, 44(11), 1008-1023.
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
系統版面圖檔 系統版面圖檔