Safety and Human Factors: Reducing Risk in AR Deployments

While cybersecurity threats grab headlines, the physical and cognitive risks associated with AR deployment can be equally damaging to organizations and individuals. A worker injured while using poorly designed AR interfaces, or a critical error caused by information overload, can have immediate and lasting consequences that extend far beyond data breaches.

What are human factors in AR?

Human factors in engineering focuses on optimizing the interaction between people and systems. In AR contexts, this includes ergonomics, cognitive load, situational awareness, and user acceptance. Poorly designed AR experiences can lead to fatigue, errors, or even accidents, especially in industrial or field environments where safety is paramount.

The unique challenges of human AR factors include:

Visual and Cognitive Load: AR overlays information onto the real world, potentially creating visual clutter or cognitive overload. Users must process both digital and physical information simultaneously, which can lead to attention tunneling or missed critical cues.

Ergonomic Considerations: Head-mounted displays can cause neck strain, eye fatigue, and balance issues, particularly during extended use. The weight distribution, field of view, and display brightness all impact user comfort and safety.

Situational Awareness: AR can enhance situational awareness by providing contextual information, but it can also reduce it by obscuring important visual cues or creating false confidence in automated systems.

Social and Environmental Factors: AR use in shared spaces can create safety hazards for both users and bystanders who may not be aware of the user’s altered perception of reality.

How to reduce risk:

Use AREA’s assessment tools to evaluate your AR solutions before deployment. The Safety and Human Factors Assessment Framework provides a systematic approach to identifying and mitigating risks throughout the AR development and deployment lifecycle.

The framework includes several key components:

Risk Identification: Systematic evaluation of potential hazards associated with AR use in specific environments and tasks. This includes physical hazards (trips, falls, collisions), cognitive hazards (information overload, distraction), and social hazards (isolation, communication barriers).

User-Centered Design: Involving end users in testing and feedback loops throughout the development process. This includes usability testing, ergonomic assessments, and long-term studies of user adaptation and acceptance.

Environmental Assessment: Evaluating the physical and social environment where AR will be used. Factors such as lighting conditions, noise levels, space constraints, and the presence of moving machinery or vehicles all impact safety.

Training and Support: Developing comprehensive training programs that address not just how to use AR systems, but how to use them safely. This includes recognizing signs of fatigue, understanding system limitations, and knowing when to disengage from AR interfaces.

Real-world examples from AREA use cases and fireside chats demonstrate the importance of human factors considerations:

Manufacturing Case Study: One AREA member shared how a simple change in AR interface design reduced user errors by 30%. The original design placed critical safety information in the peripheral vision area, where it was often missed during complex assembly tasks. Moving this information to the central field of view dramatically improved safety outcomes.

Training Application: Another use case highlighted the importance of regular safety drills for AR-equipped workers. Initial deployment showed promising productivity gains, but incident rates increased due to over-reliance on AR guidance. Implementing regular “AR-off” drills helped maintain situational awareness and emergency response capabilities.

Field Service: A telecommunications company discovered that AR-guided maintenance procedures were causing technicians to ignore standard safety protocols. The AR interface was so engaging that users focused exclusively on digital instructions while ignoring physical safety cues. Redesigning the interface to include explicit safety reminders and environmental awareness prompts resolved the issue.

The AREA Safety and Human Factors Assessment includes practical tools for measuring and improving AR safety:

Usability Metrics: Standardized measures of task completion time, error rates, and user satisfaction that can be tracked over time and compared across different AR implementations.

Physiological Monitoring: Guidelines for measuring eye strain, neck tension, and other physical indicators of AR-related stress or fatigue.

Cognitive Load Assessment: Methods for evaluating the mental workload imposed by AR interfaces and identifying opportunities for simplification or optimization.

Safety Culture Integration: Strategies for incorporating AR safety considerations into existing organizational safety programs and cultures.

Implementation Best Practices

Start with low-risk applications and gradually expand to more critical use cases as experience and confidence grow. Training simulations and maintenance support are often good starting points before moving to safety-critical applications.

Establish clear protocols for AR use, including when to engage and disengage AR interfaces, how to handle system failures, and procedures for emergency situations. These protocols should be regularly practiced and updated based on experience.

Monitor user feedback and safety metrics continuously. Early warning signs of human factors issues include increased error rates, user complaints about fatigue or discomfort, and reluctance to use AR systems.

Collaborate with safety professionals, ergonomics experts, and human factors engineers throughout the AR development and deployment process. Their expertise is essential for identifying and mitigating risks that may not be obvious to AR developers or IT professionals.

Final thought:

Security and safety go hand in hand in AR deployments. By addressing human factors early in the development process, you not only protect your people, but you also boost AR adoption and ROI. Users who feel safe and comfortable with AR systems are more likely to embrace them fully and realize their potential benefits.

The investment in human factors assessment and design pays dividends in reduced training costs, lower error rates, improved user satisfaction, and most importantly, safer workplaces. In an era where AR is becoming mission-critical for many enterprises, human factors can’t be an afterthought—they must be built into the foundation of every AR deployment.

[Supporting Visual: AR Safety & Human Factors Risk Matrix – See attached branded risk assessment matrix with specific AR risk examples and mitigation framework]