Comparison of four different backpacks intended for school use

被引:30
|
作者
Mackie, HW
Legg, SJ
Beadle, J
Hedderley, D
机构
[1] UNITEC, Sch Sport, Auckland, New Zealand
[2] Massey Univ, Coll Business, Dept Human Resource Management, Ctr Ergon Occupat Safety & Hlth, Palmerston North, New Zealand
[3] Massey Univ, Dept Stat, Stat Res & Consulting Ctr, Palmerston North, New Zealand
关键词
backpack; school; design; ergonomics;
D O I
10.1016/S0003-6870(03)00034-6
中图分类号
T [工业技术];
学科分类号
08 ;
摘要
Four backpacks were evaluated for their desireability for use as school bags. Three of the four backpacks were specifically designed for school use based on previous research and ergonomic principles while the fourth (standard) backpack was chosen from two backpacks that their manufacturer considered to be the most likely to be used as a school bag. Twelve school students evaluated each of the backpacks firstly by examining them, again after donning them and again after walking with them on a treadmill by completing a questionnaire asking about the appearance, function and comfort of each backpack. On initial examination, the standard backpack was the most favoured but as functionality became increasingly important during the treadmill walk, the backpack which was designed specifically for school use and had two major compartments, substantial back padding and side compression straps became the most favoured. This particular design of backpack was reported as having the greatest practicality, being the least physically demanding and allowing the greatest balance and ease of walking. The results of this study suggest that school student's preference of backpack may change from when they first examine a prospective backpack to when they have used it. The study also shows that school students' preferred attributes in a backpack may shift over this time from 'style and image' to 'function and fit'. (C) 2003 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:257 / 264
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Comparison of four different visibility analyzing approaches
    Shu Ju Cai Ji Yu Chu Li, 1 (122-127):
  • [22] Comparison of Four Immobilization Methods for Different Transaminases
    Heinks, Tobias
    Montua, Nicolai
    Teune, Michelle
    Liedtke, Jan
    Hoehne, Matthias
    Bornscheuer, Uwe T.
    von Mollard, Gabriele Fischer
    CATALYSTS, 2023, 13 (02)
  • [23] A comparison of four different endovenous ablation techniques
    Korkmaz, Kemal
    Yener, Ali Umit
    Genc, Serhat Bahadir
    Gedik, Hikmet Selcuk
    Budak, Ali Baran
    Cagli, Kerim
    TURK GOGUS KALP DAMAR CERRAHISI DERGISI-TURKISH JOURNAL OF THORACIC AND CARDIOVASCULAR SURGERY, 2017, 25 (02): : 209 - 215
  • [24] A comparison of four different block bootstrap methods
    Radovanov, Boris
    Marcikic, Aleksandra
    CROATIAN OPERATIONAL RESEARCH REVIEW, 2014, 5 (02) : 189 - 202
  • [25] Comparison of four different digital watermarking techniques
    Song, YJ
    Tan, TN
    2000 5TH INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SIGNAL PROCESSING PROCEEDINGS, VOLS I-III, 2000, : 946 - 950
  • [26] Comparison of four different phenylalanine determination methods
    Fingerhut, R
    Stehn, M
    Kohlschutter, A
    CLINICA CHIMICA ACTA, 1997, 264 (01) : 65 - 73
  • [27] A comparison of four different techniques of assisted hatching
    Balaban, B
    Urman, B
    Alatas, C
    Mercan, R
    Mumcu, A
    Isiklar, A
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2002, 17 (05) : 1239 - 1243
  • [28] Comparison of four different binocular balancing techniques
    Momeni-Moghaddam, Hamed
    Goss, David A.
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL OPTOMETRY, 2014, 97 (05) : 422 - 425
  • [29] Use the money as intended
    Hoffman, G
    AVIATION WEEK & SPACE TECHNOLOGY, 1997, 146 (14): : 6 - 6
  • [30] Comparison of four Salmonella isolation techniques in four different inoculated matrices
    Rybolt, ML
    Wills, RW
    Byrd, JA
    Doler, TP
    Bailey, RH
    POULTRY SCIENCE, 2004, 83 (07) : 1112 - 1116