Sunteți pe pagina 1din 15

ERGONOMÍA OCUPACIONAL

INVESTIGACIONES Y APLICACIONES

VOL. 12
SOCIEDAD DE ERGONOMISTAS DE MÉXICO A.C. (SEMAC)
2019
ERGONOMÍA OCUPACIONAL
INVESTIGACIONES Y SOLUCIONES

VOL. 12

EDITADO POR:

CARLOS ESPEJO GUASCO


Presidente SEMAC 2017-2020

ELISA CHACON MARTINEZ


Presidente SEMAC 2012-2014

ENRIQUE DE LA VEGA BUSTILLOS


Presidente SEMAC 2002-2004

FRANCISCO OCTAVIO LOPEZ MILLAN


Presidente SEMAC 2014-2017
2019 Sociedad de Ergonomistas de México A.C. (SEMAC)
ISBN: 978-0-578-48915-5
Prefacio

Este año tenemos una doble celebracion. Por una parte, estamos cumpliendo 25 años de
llevar a cabo una gran labor academica y de difusion. Hace veinticinco años inicio sus labores
la Sociedad de Ergonomistas de Mexico, A.C. agrupando a los investigadores academicos,
medicos de empresas, ingenieros industriales, enfermeras laborales y a todos aquellos que
les preocupe el trabajador que hace su labor diaria y debe hacerlo de forma segura y
saludable, sin olvidar el otro lado que es la ejecucion del sistema productivo, es decir la
calidad y productividad. Uno de los grandes logros de estos veiticinco años es la difucion de
los avances que se hacen en la academia o en las empresas con la publicacion de nuestra
doceava edicion del libro “ERGONOMIA OCUPACIONAL, INVESTIGACIONES Y
APLICACIONES” que desde su volumen inicial se ha puesto para su consulta en la pagina de
nuestra Sociedad sin costo para la persona que quiera consulta esta obra. Un gran esfuerzo
de todos que hacemos posible esta obra.

El otro motivo que tenemos para celebrar es la doble publicacion en el Diario Oficial de la
Federacion de las nuevas Normas Oficiales Mexicanas por parte de la Secretaria de Trabajo
y Prevision Social. El 23 de Ocubre del año pasado se publicó la NOM-035-STPS-2018,
Factores de riesgo psicosocial en el trabajo-Identificación, análisis y prevención.
Exactamente un mes después se publicó la NOM-036-1-STPS-2017, Factores de riesgo
ergonómico en el trabajo-Identificación, análisis, prevención y control. Parte 1-Manejo
manual de cargas. SEMAC, en su momento, ha participado desde su redacción de esta
Norma, además reviso el proyecto de la misma y presento en tiempo y forma ante la STPS
las observaciones que creyo necesarias para un cambio en la redacción de la NOM-036 y
que fuera mas accesible a todos los involucrados en el proceso ergonómico dentro de los
centros de trabajo. La mayoría de estas observaciones fueron tomadas en cuenta y
estamos seguros que somos parte importante para su publicación.
Aunque no son de aplicación inmediata, con la publicación de estas normas, México se
convierte en el primer país del mundo en hacer obligatorias para los centros de trabajo la
identificación, evaluación y control de los factores de riesgo psicosocial y ergonómico. A
diferencia de la NOM-035, la NOM-036 solo cubre el manejo manual de cargas esperamos
que en el corto plazo se publique los factores de riesgo ergonómico para el trabajo repetitivo
y para otros tipos de trabajo. Consideramos que esto es de suma importancia para el
bienestar de nuestros trabajadores.
Los editores, árbitros y comité académico, a nombre de la Sociedad de Ergonomistas de
México, A.C., agradecemos a los autores de los artículos aquí presentados su esfuerzo, e
interés por participar y compartir su trabajo y conocimientos en este nuevo libro. También
agradecemos a los autores provenientes de muy diversos lugares y formaciones su valiosa
aportación que estamos seguros derivará en el avance de la ergonomía en las Instituciones
de Educación Superior y en la planta productiva nacional y mundial.

Enrique de la Vega Bustillos


Presidente SEMAC 2002 – 2004

SOCIEDAD DE ERGONOMISTAS DE MÉXICO A.C.


“Trabajo para optimizar el trabajo”
Ergonomía Ocupacional. Investigaciones y Aplicaciones. Vol 12 2019

LATIN AMERICAN COMPLEXITY AND CONSTRUCTIVISM


METHODOLOGICAL CONTRIBUTIONS TO PARTICIPATORY
ERGONOMICS

Francisco Platas-López1, and Eric Ismael Castañeda-López 2

1Culture
House in Tlalpan
Autonomous University of México State
Triunfo de la Libertad 9 bis
Centro de Tlalpan
CDMX, 14000
Corresponding author’s e-mail: fplatasl@uaemex.mx
2Faculty
of Architecture
Postgraduate Department of Architecture, City and Territory
National Autonomous University of México
Av. Universidad 3000
University City
CDMX, 04510
Corresponding author’s e-mail: kahakbala@gmail.com

Resumen La presente investigación tiene como objetivo presentar los estudios de


ergonomía participativa y analizar su aplicación en países latinoamericanos. Se
exponen métodos vanguardistas de la ergonomía participativa que permiten
analizar su campo epistemológico y de método. Finalmente, se visualizará la
pertinencia en países latinoamericanos para generar una propuesta de aplicabilidad
desde la complejidad y el constructivismo.

Palabras clave: Ergonomía participativa, diseño participativo, complejidad,


constructivismo.

Relevancia para la ergonomía: Se presenta un diseño participativo de vanguardia


para aplicarse en ergonomía participativa en América Latina. Se propone la
pertinencia de una metodología de ergonomía participativa latinoamericana.

Abstract: The research aims to present participatory ergonomics studies for


analyzing its application in Latin American countries. The participative ergonomics
is exposed so as to allow the analysis of its epistemological field and method, as well
as the relevance in Latin American countries. Finally, a constructivist research and
complex methodology of Latin American participatory ergonomics is looked into
taking into consideration some characteristics and problems.

Keywords: Participatory ergonomics, participatory design, complexity,


constructivism.

SOCIEDAD DE ERGONOMISTAS DE MEXICO, A.C. Página 449


Ergonomía Ocupacional. Investigaciones y Aplicaciones. Vol 12 2019

Relevance to Ergonomics: The first state-of-the-art items in Latin American


participatory design and ergonomic design is presented. A methodology of Latin
American participatory ergonomics is investigated by considering some
characteristics and problems.

1. INTRODUCTION

The research presents the experiences of participatory design and complexity


theories that have been successfully applied in Latin-American architectural and
urban studies. The research presents a new participatory ergonomics methodology
founded in Latin American participatory design experiences.

2. OBJETIVES

To generate a state-of-the-art of the main contributions of participatory design


theorists in Latin America.
To identify constructivist proposals and theories of Latin American complexity to be
applied in participatory ergonomics.
To propose a complex methodology of participatory Latin American ergonomics.

3. METHODOLOGY

1. State-of-the-art. Documentary research: In this phase the Latin American literature


is contrasted with the most relevant Anglo-Saxon one on the subject.
2. Latin-American contributions to participatory design. This phase justifies the need
to include Latin American experiences for a new methodological proposal of
participatory ergonomics. The case study is a complex thinking (Edgar Morin) and a
constructivist research method (Rolando García).
3. Conclusions and recommendations

4. RESULTS

4.1 Participatory ergonomic: State-of-the-art

Modern participatory ergonomics is said to have begun in 1980 with the discursive
base of involving workers to identify risks and propose solutions in labor processes
(García, et al., 2009). In the first decades of the 20th century the proposal had little
evidence and supporting theories (Haines, et al., 2002), this panorama changed at
the beginning of the 21st century, as studies have been increasing. Between 1985
and 2004 there were 442 papers identified for their quantitative studies about
participatory ergonomics (Cole, 2005).

SOCIEDAD DE ERGONOMISTAS DE MEXICO, A.C. Página 450


Ergonomía Ocupacional. Investigaciones y Aplicaciones. Vol 12 2019

Burgess - Limerick (2018) states that these studies include a greater


participation of workers in a consultative or representative way to reduce
occupational risks, proposing managerial decision-making, improve working
environments in the "macro-sphere" when redesigning jobs and in the organization
of work in the "micro-sphere" that affects the redesign of working teams.
Despite the increase in studies of participatory ergonomics, this scenario does
not occur in studies in Spanish. On the European Ergopar page, 21 materials are
cited in Spanish, which detail the experiences of the use of participatory ergonomics
methodologies in articles, employment experiences and videos (Ergopar, 2019). Of
these materials, four are experiences on vulnerable conditions: Participatory
ergonomics in attention to disability; participatory experiences in centers for the
disabled and experiences of participatory ergonomics in four centers for the disabled
(Ergopar, 2019). In Latin America, information is still lower. Therefore, it is necessary
to propose strategies of participatory ergonomics to be applied in disadvantaged
societies.
Due to the few studies of participatory ergonomics in Latin America, the
epistemological field and the method are marked by external experiences in these
countries. The field of action of participatory ergonomics is located in an
epistemology of economic rationality and its method in strategic planning. Its
epistemological base seeks the maximization of resources to achieve productive
ends. For García, et al. (2009) participatory ergonomics has as a strategy the
planning of work to achieve a specific goal. Wilson (1995) explains that the strategy
is to include workers so that they influence their own work processes and obtain
desirable goals.
Accordingly, Table 1 is presented, in which the proposal of participatory
ergonomics is summarized.

SOCIEDAD DE ERGONOMISTAS DE MEXICO, A.C. Página 451


Ergonomía Ocupacional. Investigaciones y Aplicaciones. Vol 12 2019

Table 1. Participatory ergonomic methodologies

Burgess – Limerick García, A. Gadea, R. Camelo (2013) Summary


(2018) Sevilla, M. Genís, S. y
Ronda, E. (2009)
1 Location of the 1 Forecast of problems 1 Planning and 1 Approach to the
power to make with foreseeable delimitation of the problem situation.
decisions. obstacles for the project of the
development of the company.
program.
2 Representative 2 Participation of workers 2 Review of 2 Research
participation of who make proposals and experiences and design
workers and solutions. methodologies
identification of
problems to be dealt
with.
3 The specialist 3 Participation of workers 3 Development of 3 Research and
is a facilitator who in the evaluation and the design and analysis
can be consulted by effectiveness of solutions. accessibility project.
workers during the
results process.
4 Approach directed 4 Commitment of 4 Proposal linked to 4 Writing the
to the level of design management to establish participation to report and
with respect to the the scope of resources. implement design socializing
tasks undertaken. ideas. results.
5 Intervention at the 5 The specialist supports 5 Proposal linked to 5 Diagnoses.
level of the work the development of the participation to
team or department program, management implement design
for the entire and supported the ideas.
organization. necessary tasks.
6 Permanence of the 6 Adjustment in each 6 Proposal linked to 6 Generation of
intervention to solve phase with a broad focus participation to the program.
the proposed on health as in the work implement design
program. environment. ideas.
7 Possible 7 Cost evaluation - 7 Proposal linked to 7 Evaluation and
permanence of the benefits to anticipate participation to execution.
intervention to solve expected results. implement design
problems. ideas.

Source: Own elaboration based on Burgess – Limerick (2018), García, A. Gadea,


R. Sevilla, M. Genís, S. y Ronda, E. (2009) and Camelo (2013).

SOCIEDAD DE ERGONOMISTAS DE MEXICO, A.C. Página 452


Ergonomía Ocupacional. Investigaciones y Aplicaciones. Vol 12 2019

Participatory ergonomics with its rational approach seeks to register


improvements in the productive process from the workers themselves, this vision
can be validated in societies with a high average level of social equality and strong
labor rights. However, in developing countries, as in the case of Mexico or Colombia
(García, Camelo, y Rodríguez, 2017), they have the difficulty of wide margins of
social and labor inequality produced by global development. That authors like Saravi
(2009) and Bayón (2012) frame it as an accumulation of social disadvantages, and
they become evident in an urbanity with high percentages of popular settlements
that are consolidated in decades (Suárez, 2017) , and with a high rate of informal
work. Therefore, it is necessary to make adjustments both at an epistemological level
and as a method to achieve its applicability in Latin America.

4.2 Latin-American contributions to participatory design

The first difference is to consider participation as a process. A process is a change


or a series of changes that constitute the course of action of relationships that are
designated as "causal" between events (natural or produced by human intervention)
(García, 2000, p. 70). This is how morphological or object analysis is not what only
matters, but also the process that brings with it the ergonomic design of the action
to be analyzed.
Unlike some Anglo-Saxon proposals that define participatory ergonomics as
“The involvement of people in planning and controlling a significant amount of their
own work activities, with sufficient knowledge and power to influence both processes
and outcomes in order to achieve desirable goals” (Wilson, 1991) Gustavo Romero
y Rosendo Mesías (2004) points out an important difference between planning and
participatory design. For Romero (2004), planning is aimed at organizing generally
complex processes and directing them to specific objectives, in terms of their
activities, uses, possible resources and the construction of consensus and decisions
to achieve the objectives. For its part, the design aims to prefigure solutions and
morphological and spatial responses appropriate to the demands that may or may
not be part of a planned process (Romero, 2004). This difference has made it
possible to differentiate proposals that only serve the organization and those that
prefigure design responses.
Based on Romero's (Oliveras, 2008) proposal, a methodology of participatory
ergonomics that includes planning and design can allow: fostering democratic
culture in decision making, a proposal to generate strategies in less favored groups
of society and a tool for ergonomics experts are incorporated into these processes.
Now, the tool that allows us to approach this type of process has been the
complexity approach. The complexity has been addressed through two
perspectives: The complex thinking of Edgar Morin and the genetic constructivism
of Rolando García.

4.2.1 Morin´s epistemic influence on participatory design

The derivation of this perspective has opened new possibilities of teaching with new
approaches based on complex thinking. This proposal, developed by Edgar Morin,

SOCIEDAD DE ERGONOMISTAS DE MEXICO, A.C. Página 453


Ergonomía Ocupacional. Investigaciones y Aplicaciones. Vol 12 2019

is a reorganization of the relationships between science, philosophy and art through


an interdisciplinary and trans-disciplinary articulation of knowledge focused on
anthropologic problems (Morin, 2007). From educational, anthropologic, political and
ethical theories, complex thinking has influenced syllabi from different educational
institutions; in Brazil, the Institute of Complexity Studies (Instituto de Estudios de
Complejidad) of Río de Janeiro and the Universidad del Río Grande del Norte; in
Perú, the Universidad de Lambayeque or the Universidad Ricardo Palma de Lima;
in Uruguay, the Latin American Center for Human Economy (Centro
Latinoamericano de Economía Humana); in Colombia, the Colombian Association
for Complex Thought (Asociación Colombiana para el Pensamiento Complejo); in
Argentina, the Community of Complex Thought (Comunidad de Pensamiento
Complejo) and in México, the Real Edgar Morin World Multiversity (Multiversidad
Mundo Real Edgar Morin) in Hermosillo Sonora.
The complex thinking approaches in Latin America have allowed questioning the
so-called “blind intelligence”, this is, that knowledge which is incapable of reflecting
on itself and that is manipulated by anonymous powers and that go further away
from everyday human problems. This has given way to a debate on how many a
times specialization has led to a fragmentation of the problems of reality (Martin
Juez, 2002). Similarly, it has proposed the use of a poetic function and the metaphor
on the generation of algorithms and models. Its influence opened the possibility of
acquiring knowledge that, not being of a scientific nature, may be legitimized by the
transition from a symbolic order to a real one with an ethical commitment.

4.2.2 Garcia´s influence on participatory design

In the face of the crisis of apriorism and empiricism related to the general problem
of knowledge, Rolando García developed the genetic constructivist epistemology. It
is an epistemology because it refers to the conception of knowledge; it is
constructivist as it considers that reality is not given, but constructed by the
researcher, and genetic since its objective is to study the genesis of knowledge.
Parting from Piaget’s ideas, Rolando García developed the complex systems
interdisciplinary research methodology. Said proposal generated novel design
research approaches in Latin America as this was founded on a process that
constitute one of the basic mechanisms of cognitive development: the differentiation
process from a given reality and the integration or reintegration of a conceptually
more enriched totality.
To Rolando García (1988), the complex systems interdisciplinary research
methodology sees the light when there is a need of creating new questions to solve
“old problems” with the integration of different types of knowledge. The complex
system or piece of reality a researcher wishes to study would only be possible to
face if there is a common conceptual framework shared by all researchers involved
(García, 1994). The methodology proposed by García is of an operational character
and was configured as an option of the positivist proposal where the specialist work
is not undervalued, but rather it is integrated at different stages of a research project.
By means of this methodology, large-scale systems in Latin America cities
design (López Rangel, 2018), and problems related to vulnerable societies have

SOCIEDAD DE ERGONOMISTAS DE MEXICO, A.C. Página 454


Ergonomía Ocupacional. Investigaciones y Aplicaciones. Vol 12 2019

been studied as complex systems (Osnaya, et al 2017). Similarly, there have been
contributions to interdisciplinary research on natural disasters and attention to
vulnerable societies based on his approach.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations for the application of participatory ergonomics in Latin America


should take into account the context of social, labor and cultural diversity.
Consequently, participatory ergonomics and complexity will be called, this last
category arises from the epistemology of complex thought and genetic
constructivism.
The distinction between participatory ergonomics and complexity with
participative ergonomics focuses on the fact that participation, being a constantly
changing process, tends to reorganize labor actions with respect to means - ends of
subjects in correlation with objects (García, 2000). But such maximization is not
considered in itself with a rational economic primacy, but the means - ends of the
participatory planning depend on adequate conditions of use of the design (Romero,
2004), and this adaptation part of the social meanings that allow appropriation and
appropriation in a specific social context (Castañeda, 2012). This vision considers
transdisciplinary articulations (Morin, 2007), in the process of planning and designing
labor systems.
Hence, the following epistemological bases are indicated: 1) It is necessary to
correlate participatory ergonomics with complexity so that the interrelation between
labor objects and processes is visualized together with the subjects with their social
meanings that make possible the actions of social and material objects. 2)
Participative ergonomics will aim not at designing the work system but at redesigning
the system according to social regions. 3) The productive process itself is irreducible
to the economic model but it will be open to other social functions accompanied by
symbolic representations (Godelier, 1989), which are multiple and constructed
realities (Castañeda, 2012). 4) The study of regional realities are interpretable
(Geertz, 2003), and will have to adapt to the conditions of the region.
The method of participatory ergonomics and complexity incorporates an
approach that points to alternative labor processes from participatory action research
(Ander - Egg, 1990): I) Approach to the problem situation through the formation of a
team between specialists and applicants. Include in the decision-making productive
models: cooperatives, small local businesses, financing, technical assistance times,
among others. And linkage to existing regulations or potential to modify the existing
rules. II) Research design that correlates social meanings, production, work and
possible scenarios of transfer of social and technical technologies that are
appropriate and appropriable to regional realities to generate self-managing
processes. III) Research and analysis of data from qualitative and quantitative
methods. IV) Drafting of the report and socialization of results that keeps open the
possibility of enriching the diagnosis by making them available to the interested
community. V) Diagnosis of the problem situation with SWOT analysis. VI)

SOCIEDAD DE ERGONOMISTAS DE MEXICO, A.C. Página 455


Ergonomía Ocupacional. Investigaciones y Aplicaciones. Vol 12 2019

Generation of the program with possible solution scenarios. VII) Evaluation and
execution of the program.

CONCLUSIONS

The research provides a state-of-the-art of the main contributions of participatory


design theorists in Latin America and proposes a Latin American methodology of
participatory ergonomics. Although, mainly, in the Anglo-Saxon countries there are
several participatory ergonomics studies, in Latin America there is small information
on the subject. However, the above, the experience of participatory design based on
constructivist approaches and complexity have been used successfully in Latin
America and the methodology is a useful in participatory ergonomics

REFERENCES

Ander – Egg, E. (1990). Repensando la investigación acción participativa.


Comentarios, críticas y sugerencias. México: Ateneo.
Bayón, M. (2012). El "lugar" de los pobres: espacio, representaciones sociales y
estigmas en la ciudad de México. Revista Mexicana de Sociología, 74(1), 133 –
166.
Burgess-Limerick, R. (2018). Participatory ergonomics: Evidence and
implementation lesson. Applied Ergonomics, 68, 289 – 293.
Camelo, F. (2013). Metodología para la accesibilidad en el espacio físico de los
puestos de trabajo. Una perspectiva desde el diseño y la ergonomía
participativa. El Hombre y la Máquina, núm. 42 – 43. Recuperado el 15 de Marzo
de 2019, de https://www.redalyc.org/articulo.oa?id=47829722009
Castañeda, E. (2012). Arquitectura participativa constructivista: Estrategias de
enseñanza – aprendizaje. Tesis de maestría. Universidad Nacional Autónoma
de México.
Castillo, J. (2018). Crisis y oportunidades: El futuro del trabajo y de la ergonomía.
Revista Ciencias de la salud, 16, 4 – 7.
Cole, D. Rivilis, I. Van Eerd, D. Cullen, K. Irvin, E. y Kramer, D. (2005). Effectiveness
of participatory ergonomic interventions: a systematic review. Recuperado el 15
de Marzo de 2019, de https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK71361/
Ergopar (2014), El método Ergopar. Recuperado el 15 de marzo de 2019, de
http://ergopar.istas.net/
Fernandez, M. Cabaco, L. Litago, U. Pérez, L. y Barahona, E (2015). Ergonomía
física y cognitiva en discapacidad: propuesta de un prototipo. International
Journal of Developmental and Educational Psychology, 2(1), 329-338.
García, A. Gadea, R. Sevilla, M. Genís, S. y Ronda, E. (2009). Ergonomía
participativa: empoderamiento de los trabajadores para la prevención de
trastornos musuloesqueleticos, Revista Española de Salud Pública, 83(4), 509
– 518.

SOCIEDAD DE ERGONOMISTAS DE MEXICO, A.C. Página 456


Ergonomía Ocupacional. Investigaciones y Aplicaciones. Vol 12 2019

García, R. (1988). Deterioro ambiental y pobreza en la abundancia productiva: El


caso de la Comarca Lagunera. México: Centro de Investigación y de Estudios
Avanzados del I.P.N International Federation of Institutes for Advanced Study
García, R. (1994). Interdisciplinariedad y sistemas complejos. En Ciencias sociales
y formación ambiental (pp. 85 - 124). España: Gedisa.
Geertz, C. (2007). La interpretación de las culturas. España: Gedisa.
Godelier, M. (1989). Lo ideal y lo material. Pensamiento, economías, sociedades.
Madrid: Taurus.
Haines, H. Wilson, JR. Vink, P. Koningsveld, E. (2002). Validating a framework for
participatory ergonomics (the PEF). Ergonomics. 45, 309-27.
Hernández, P. (2007) Ergonomía. Su aplicación en salud ocupacional. Revista
cubana de salud y trabajo, 8(2), 21 – 63.
López, R. (2019). Obras. Recuperado el 15 de marzo de 2019, de
www.rafaellopezrangel.com
Martín Juez, F. (2002) Contribuciones para una antropología del diseño, Barcelona:
Gedisa.
Morin, E. (2007). Introducción al pensamiento complejo. Barcelona: Gedisa.
Saraví, G. (2009). Transiciones vulnerables. Juventud, desigualdad y exclusión en
México. México: Centro de Investigaciones y Estudios Superiores en
Antropología Social.
Suárez, P. (Coord.) (2017). Suelo para vivienda de la población de menores
ingresos en la zona metropolitana del valle de México. México: Universidad
Nacional Autónoma de México.
Oliveras, R. Romero, G. y Mesias, R. (Coords.) (2008). El planeamiento participativo
en los procesos de la producción social del hábitat. Cuba: CYTED-HABYTED-
Red XIV.F.
Osnaya, S. Platas, F. Zaur, J. Ocaña, R. Carretero, F. Morán, A. Toledo, E. y Décaro,
L. (2017) Diseño, academia e investigación para la vida cotidiana. Antología
Internacional. Tomo 1. México: Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México.
Romero, G. y Mesías, R. (Coords.) (2004). La participación en el diseño urbano y
arquitectónico en la producción social del hábitat. Cuba: CYTED-HABYTED-
Red XIV.F.
García, H. Camelo, F. y Rodríguez, L. (2017). El Diseño como Facilitador de la
Inclusión Laboral de Personas en Condición de Discapacidad Física. Caso
Almacenes Paraíso SA. Encuentros, 15(2), 99-113.
Van Eerd, D. Cole, D. y Steenstra, I. (2016). Participatory Ergonomics for Return to
Work. In Handbook of Return to Work (pp. 289-305). Boston: Springer.
Wilson, JR. (1995). Ergonomics and participation. In Evaluation of human Work: A
Practical Ergonomics Methodology, (pp. 1071-1096). London: Taylor & Francis.
Wilson, JR. y Haines, H. (1997) Participatory ergonomics, in Handbook of Human
Factors and Ergonomics (pp. 490 – 513). New York: Wiley.

SOCIEDAD DE ERGONOMISTAS DE MEXICO, A.C. Página 457