The Purpose of HAMMLAB and the Theoretical Basis for Experimental Research

Conference paper


In HAMMLAB, we conduct experimental research on human potentials and limitations in an operational control room environment, focusing both on the interaction among humans and human–machine interaction. The experimental results are used for design, evaluation and safety assessment of complex production systems. The work done in HAMMLAB has traditionally been rooted in the nuclear domain through its central position in the OECD Halden Reactor Project, but in the later years other industries have also been addressed. This chapter explains the purpose of HAMMLAB and describes a general theoretical basis for experimental research. Finally, a position on future methodologies in HAMMLAB is suggested.


Nuclear Power Plant Accident Scenario Explanatory Tradition Human Reliability Statistical Conclusion Validity 


  1. Bye A, Laumann K, Braarud PØ, Massaiu S (2006) Methodology for improving HRA by simulator studies. In: Stamatelatos MG, Blackman HS (eds) Proceedings of the eighth international conference on probabilistic safety assessment and management, PSAM8, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA, 14–18 May 2006Google Scholar
  2. Cohen J (1994) The earth is round (p < .05). Am Psychol 49(12):997–1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cook TD, Campbell DT (1979) Quasi-experimentation: design and analysis issues for field settings. Rand McNally, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  4. Descartes R (1647) Meditations on first philosophy (1980). Aschehoug, OsloGoogle Scholar
  5. Gadamer H (1960) Truth and method, 2nd edn. Sheed and Ward, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Hempel CG (1970) Aspects of scientific explanation: and other essays in the philosophy of science. Free Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Hirschberg S et al (2004) CSNI technical opinion papers no. 4, human reliability analysis in probabilistic safety assessment for nuclear power plants, OECD 2004, NEA no. 5068Google Scholar
  8. Howell DC (1997) Statistical methods for psychology, 4th edn. Wadsworth, CAGoogle Scholar
  9. Jones JL (1995) Understanding psychological science. Harper Collins, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Kirk RE (1995) Experimental design: procedures for the behavioral sciences, 3rd edn. Brooks Cole, Pacific GroveMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Kuhn T (1962) The structure of scientific revolutions. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  12. Mill JS (1843) A system of logic ratiocinative and inductive being a connected view of the principles of evidence and the method of scientific investigation (Books I–III). In: Robson JM (ed) The collected works of John Stuart Mill, vol 7. University of Toronto Press/Routledge and Kegan Paul, Toronto/LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Neale JM, Liebert RM (1986) Science and behavior: an introduction to methods of research. Englewood Cliffs, Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar
  14. Pedhazur EJ, Pedhazur Schmelkin L (1991) Measurement, design, and analysis. An integrated approach. Lawrence Erlbaum, HillsdaleGoogle Scholar
  15. Popper KR (1935) The logic of scientific discovery (1968). Hutchinson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  16. Popper KR (1963) Conjectures and refutations. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  17. Russell B (1913) On the notion of cause. In: Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 13Google Scholar
  18. Skraaning G (2003) Experimental control versus realism: methodological solutions for simulator studies in complex operating environments. OECD Halden Reactor Project (HPR-361). Dr. philos. dissertation NTNU, TrondheimGoogle Scholar
  19. Sträter O (2005) Cognition and safety, an integrated approach to systems design and assessment. Ashgate, HampshireGoogle Scholar
  20. Wilkinson L (1999) Statistical methods in psychology journals. Guidelines and explanations. Am Psychol 54(8):594–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited  2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.OECD Halden Reactor ProjectInstitutt for EnergiteknikkHaldenNorway

Personalised recommendations