From unknown to familiar: An exploratory longitudinal field study on occupational exoskeletons adoption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Occupational exoskeletons hold promise in preventing musculoskeletal disorders, but their effectiveness relies on their long-term use by workers. This study aims to characterize the adoption process of occupational exoskeletons by analyzing the experiences of 25 operators. Using a mixed-methods approach, both quantitative and qualitative data were collected before and during a four-week familiarization period. We primarily focused on users' expectations, subjective assessments over time, and initial experiences. Findings elucidate shifts in operators' perceptions of the devices over time. Through their narratives, we highlight how exoskeleton use impact operators' movements and the subsequent adaptations. Operators demonstrated diverse exploratory behaviors, indicating their efforts to get to grips with the effects of exoskeletons in their own ways. This study offers insights into the initial stages of occupational exoskeleton adoption, thus enriching our comprehension of rejection patterns and pathways toward their widespread acceptance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".