IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijsoma/v35y2020i3p321-338.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Feedback mode preference and performance improvement with a handheld scanning device

Author

Listed:
  • Elizabeth Copeland Beckham
  • Reuben F. Burch
  • Lesley Strawderman
  • Kari Babski-Reeves
  • Linkan Bian
  • Katherine King

Abstract

This study was conducted to determine if combining feedback modes is beneficial for operator performance on a handheld scanning device within the services distribution industry. An industrial handheld scanner was used to examine four feedback conditions: 1) auditory; 2) auditory-visual; 3) auditory-tactile; 4) auditory-visual-tactile. Participants completed one trial under each experimental feedback condition during one experimental session. In each trial, participants scanned 50 boxes during a simulated box scanning task. Task completion time, completion time ranks, hit rate and false alarms were recorded and analysed. While the auditory-visual-tactile feedback combination produced the fastest task completion time, there was no significant improvement in operator performance between the four feedback settings tested. Through further understanding of the most preferred feedback modes, or combination of such, identification of improved scanner settings for this device and task can be made.

Suggested Citation

  • Elizabeth Copeland Beckham & Reuben F. Burch & Lesley Strawderman & Kari Babski-Reeves & Linkan Bian & Katherine King, 2020. "Feedback mode preference and performance improvement with a handheld scanning device," International Journal of Services and Operations Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 35(3), pages 321-338.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijsoma:v:35:y:2020:i:3:p:321-338
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=105374
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijsoma:v:35:y:2020:i:3:p:321-338. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=150 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.