Relationships between observational estimates and physical measurements of upper limb activity

This study examined the internal validity of observational-based ergonomic job analysis methods for assessing upper limb force exertion and repetitive motion. Six manual tasks were performed by multiple 'workers' while direct measurements were made to quantify force exertion and kinematics of the upper limb. Observational-based analyses of force and upper limb motion/repetition were conducted by 29 professional ergonomists. These analysts overestimated the magnitude of individual force exertions - temporal aspects of force exertion (duty cycle) were estimated more accurately. Estimates of the relative severity of repetitive motions among the jobs were accurate. Absolute counts of repetitive motions were less accurate. Modest correlations (r(2) = 0.28 to r(2) = 0.50) were observed between ratings of hand activity level and measured joint velocities. Ergonomic job analyses relying on systematic observation should be applied and interpreted with consideration given to the capabilities and limitations of analysts in estimating the physical risk factors. These findings are relevant to a better understanding of the internal validity of ergonomic job analysis methods based on systematic observation.