The Tides of the Zodiac MK VI HD: Comparing the Usability of Inflatable Boats for Seaborne Operations

REFERENCES

• Annett, J., & Stanton, N. (2006). Task analysis. In G. P. Hodgkinson & J. K. Ford (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 45–78). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Ardito, C., Buono, P., Costabile, M. F., Lanzilotti, R., & Piccinno, A. (2011). End users as co-designers of their own tools and products. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 23(2), 78–90. doi:10.1016/j.jvlc.2011.11.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brooke, J. (1996). SUS: A “quick and dirty” usability scale. In P. W. Jordan, B. Thomas, B. A. Weerdmeester, & I. L. McClelland (Eds.), Usability evaluation in industry (pp. 189–194). London, UK: Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Brooke, J. (2013). SUS: A retrospective. Journal of Usability Studies, 8, 29–40.
   Google Scholar
• Coca, A., Roberge, R., Shepherd, A., Powell, J. B., Stull, J. O., & Williams, W. J. (2008). Ergonomic comparison of a chem/bio prototype firefighter ensemble and a standard ensemble. European Journal of Applied Physiology, 104(2), 351–359. doi:10.1007/s00421-007-0644-z.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Driskell, J. E., & Olmstead, B. (1989). Psychology and the military: Research applications and trends. American Psychologist, 44(1), 43–54. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.44.1.43
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flin, R. (2001). Selecting the right stuff: Personality and high-reliability occupations. In B. W. Roberts & R. Hogan (Eds.), Personality psychology in the workplace (pp. 253–275). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
   Google Scholar
• Gao, M., & Kortum, P. (2015). The relationship between subjective and objective usability metrics for home healthcare devices. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 59(1), 1001–1005. doi:10.1177/1541931215591286
   Google Scholar
• Grudin, J. (1995). Interactive systems: Bridging the gaps between developers and users. In R. M. Baecker, J. Grudin, W. A. S. Buxton, & S. Greenberg (Eds.), Readings in human–computer interaction (2nd ed., pp. 293–303). San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
   Google Scholar
• Hancock, P. A., & Szalma, J. L. (Eds.). (2008). Performance under stress. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Ho, S. H. (2008). The SAF's new clothes: Recognising the importance of personal equipment in the SAF (RSIS Commentaries No. 103). Singapore: Nanyang Technological University. Retrieved from https://dr.ntu.edu.sg/bitstream/handle/10220/4524/RSIS1032008.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y.
   Google Scholar
• International Organization for Standardization. (2018). Ergonomics of human-system interaction — Part 11: Usability: Definitions and concepts (ISO 9241-11). Retrieved from https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:9241:-11:ed-2:v1:en.
   Google Scholar
• Lancry, A. (2009). Que sais-je? L’ergonomie. Paris, France: Presses Universitaires de France.
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, J. R. (2012). Usability testing. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors and ergonomics (4th ed., pp. 1267–1312). New York, NY: John Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Luostarinen, R., Järvinen, R., Määttä, J., & Manner, J. (2016, May). A model for usability testing in challenging environments. Paper presented at the 2016 International Conference on Military Communications and Information Systems (ICMCIS), Brussels, Belgium. doi:10.1109/ICMCIS.2016.7496557
   Google Scholar
• Page, J. W., Asken, M. J., Zwemer, C. F., & Guido, M. (2016). Brief mental skills training improves memory and performance in high stress police cadet training. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, 31(2), 122–126. doi:10.1007/s11896-015-9171-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park, H., Park, J., Lin, S.-H., & Boorady, L. M. (2014). Assessment of firefighters’ needs for personal protective equipment. Fashion and Textiles, 1, 1–13. doi:10.1186/s40691-014-0008-3
   Google Scholar
• Sáenz Zapata L. M. (2011). Integration of ergonomics in the design process: Conceptual, methodological, and practical foundations. In W. Karwowski, M. M. Soares, & N. A. Stanton (Eds.), Human factors and ergonomics in consumer product design: Methods and techniques (pp. 155–176). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Schram, B., Hinton, B., Orr, R., Pope, R., & Norris, G. (2018). The perceived effects and comfort of various body armour systems on police officers while performing occupational tasks. Annals of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 30, 1–10. doi:10.1186/s40557-018-0228-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zinsser, N., Perkins, L. D., Gerbvais, P. D., & Burbelo, G. A. (2004). Military application of performance-enhancing psychology. Military Review, 84(5), 62–65. Retrieved from http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/milreview/zinsser.pdf.
   Google Scholar