kth.sePublications KTH
Operational message
There are currently operational disruptions. Troubleshooting is in progress.
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Interpreting Workload Variation Using Fatigue-Recovery Modeling
Human Factors Engineering Lab, Department of Mechanical, Industrial, and Mechatronic Engineering, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, Canada.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-1560-3870
Canadian Institute for Safety, Wellness, & Performance, Conestoga College Institute of Technology and Advanced Learning, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada.ORCID iD: 0000-0003-3192-1470
Human Factors Engineering Lab, Department of Mechanical, Industrial, and Mechatronic Engineering, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, Canada.ORCID iD: 0000-0001-6354-8581
KTH, School of Engineering Sciences in Chemistry, Biotechnology and Health (CBH), Biomedical Engineering and Health Systems, Ergonomics.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-7565-854X
2025 (English)In: IISE Transactions on Occupational Ergonomics and Human Factors, ISSN 2472-5838Article in journal (Refereed) Epub ahead of print
Abstract [en]

This viewpoint article addresses an approach to understanding the impact of physical workload variation using fatigue-recovery type models. Seven examples are presented in which fatigue-recovery models, including a range of fatigue types, are used to interpret the effects of time-series workload patterns without necessarily quantifying workload variation directly. These examples of fatigue-recovery model analysis approaches have been risk-validated to MSDs, validated against worker’s subjective performance, and linked to manufacturing quality deficit outcomes. While these fatigue-recovery modeling approaches aimed to understand the effects of variable workload show promise, a number of challenges remain before they can be more widely deployed in practice. This includes the need for better underlying models using data from a broader range of participants, and the application supports needed to use the approach proactively in work system design. The authors argue that resulting ‘fatigue’ indicators can be more easily understood, and therefore more readily used and more meaningful in decision making, than more complex biomechanical variables currently used in occupational workload studies.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Informa UK Limited , 2025.
Keywords [en]
Ergonomics, Human Factors, Musculoskeletal Health, Operations Analysis, Task Analysis, Time-Series Patterns, Work Exposure
National Category
Production Engineering, Human Work Science and Ergonomics Occupational Health and Environmental Health
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-373266DOI: 10.1080/24725838.2025.2584001ISI: 001611457600001PubMedID: 41204882Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-105021322345OAI: oai:DiVA.org:kth-373266DiVA, id: diva2:2016916
Note

QC 20251127

Available from: 2025-11-27 Created: 2025-11-27 Last updated: 2025-11-27Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

Rose, Linda M.

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Neumann, W. P.Yung, M.Greig, M. A.Rose, Linda M.
By organisation
Ergonomics
Production Engineering, Human Work Science and ErgonomicsOccupational Health and Environmental Health

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 31 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf