ISSN (Online): 2321-3418
server-injected
Engineering and Computer Science
Open Access

Mapping Research Themes and Trends in Ergonomics within Industry 5.0: A Bibliometric Analysis

, , ,
DOI: 10.18535/ijsrm/v12i11.ec02· Pages: 1639-1647· Vol. 12, No. 11, (2024)· Published: November 5, 2024
PDF
Views: 606 PDF downloads: 258

Abstract

Abstract:

Industry 5.0, the next stage of development after Industry 4.0, centers around the seamless integration of individuals and technology inside industrial processes to foster innovation that prioritizes human needs and experiences. Industry 5.0 diverges from Industry 4.0 by placing greater emphasis on the collaborative partnership between humans and machines rather than solely focusing on automation and advanced technologies like IoT and AI. The study employs bibliometric analysis to delineate the subjects and research areas in ergonomics within the context of Industry 5.0. The study analyzed literature from the Scopus database to identify trends and gaps in implementing ergonomic principles across different industrial sectors. The study addresses two distinct research inquiries: identifying overarching research subjects and emerging research themes. The results indicate the existence of four primary research clusters: the interaction between humans and advanced technology, the safety of work and collaboration between humans and robots, the optimization of multiple purposes and sustainable development, and the application of augmented reality in industrial design. The report emphasizes the growing importance of human-robot collaboration and artificial intelligence while acknowledging a decline in emphasis on user experience and virtual reality. The findings thoroughly analyze the present condition and development of ergonomics research in Industry 5.0 while providing significant recommendations for future investigations and real-world implementations.

 

Keywords

Artificial IntelligenceBibliometric AnalysisErgonomicsHuman-Robot CollaborationIndustry 5.0

References

  1. M. L. Pimenta, “Integração Interfuncional Em Processos De Desenvolvimento De Produtos Na Era Da Indústria 4.0,” Rev. Produção E Desenvolv., vol. 5, Jan. 2019, doi: 10.32358/rpd.2019.v5.350.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  2. C. M. Schlick and J. Bützler, Eds., “Ergonomic Design of Future Production Systems,” Occup. Ergon., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 71–72, Sep. 2015, doi: 10.3233/OER-150224.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  3. O. Asan and A. Choudhury, “Research Trends in Artificial Intelligence Applications in Human Factors Health Care: Mapping Review,” JMIR Hum. Factors, vol. 8, no. 2, p. e28236, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.2196/28236.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  4. Y. Tao, H. Hu, J. Xue, Z. Zhang, and F. Xu, “Evaluation of Ergonomic Risks for Construction Workers Based on Multicriteria Decision Framework with the Integration of Spherical Fuzzy Set and Alternative Queuing Method,” Sustainability, vol. 16, no. 10, p. 3950, May 2024, doi: 10.3390/su16103950.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  5. B. A. Kadir, O. Broberg, and C. S. D. Conceição, “Current research and future perspectives on human factors and ergonomics in Industry 4.0,” Comput. Ind. Eng., vol. 137, p. 106004, Nov. 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2019.106004.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  6. D. Bogataj, D. Battini, M. Calzavara, and A. Persona, “Investments In Workplace Ergonomics From The Supply Chain Approach,” DEStech Trans. Eng. Technol. Res., no. icpr, Mar. 2018, doi: 10.12783/dtetr/icpr2017/17591.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  7. Ma. J. J. Gumasing, E. R. A. Rendon, and J. D. German, “Sustainable Ergonomic Workplace: Fostering Job Satisfaction and Productivity among Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) Workers,” Sustainability, vol. 15, no. 18, p. 13516, Sep. 2023, doi: 10.3390/su151813516.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  8. P. Beer and R. H. Mulder, “The Effects of Technological Developments on Work and Their Implications for Continuous Vocational Education and Training: A Systematic Review,” Front. Psychol., vol. 11, p. 918, May 2020, doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00918.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  9. M. J. Ávila-Gutiérrez, S. Suarez-Fernandez De Miranda, and F. Aguayo-González, “Occupational Safety and Health 5.0—A Model for Multilevel Strategic Deployment Aligned with the Sustainable Development Goals of Agenda 2030,” Sustainability, vol. 14, no. 11, p. 6741, May 2022, doi: 10.3390/su14116741.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  10. H. Kent Baker, N. Pandey, S. Kumar, and A. Haldar, “A bibliometric analysis of board diversity: Current status, development, and future research directions,” J. Bus. Res., vol. 108, pp. 232–246, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.11.025.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  11. R. Zakaria, P. Vit, A. Wijaya, A. H. Ahmad, Z. Othman, and B. Mezzetti, “Evolution of blueberry (Vaccinium corymbosum L), raspberry (Rubus idaeus L) and strawberry (Fragaria x ananassa Duch.) research: 2012–2021,” J. Berry Res., vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 365–381, Sep. 2022, doi: 10.3233/JBR-220001.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  12. R. Pranckutė, “Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World,” Publications, vol. 9, no. 1, p. 12, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.3390/publications9010012.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  13. J. Zhu and W. Liu, “A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers,” Scientometrics, vol. 123, no. 1, pp. 321–335, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11192-020-03387-8.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  14. L. Basenach, B. Renneberg, H. Salbach, M. Dreier, and K. Wölfling, “Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of treatment interventions for Internet use disorders: Critical analysis of the methodical quality according to the PRISMA guidelines,” J. Behav. Addict., vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 9–25, Mar. 2023, doi: 10.1556/2006.2022.00087.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  15. M. Aria and C. Cuccurullo, “bibliometrix : An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis,” J. Informetr., vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 959–975, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  16. N. J. Van Eck and L. Waltman, “Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping,” Scientometrics, vol. 84, no. 2, pp. 523–538, Aug. 2010, doi: 10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  17. J. A. Moral-Muñoz, E. Herrera-Viedma, A. Santisteban-Espejo, and M. J. Cobo, “Software tools for conducting bibliometric analysis in science: An up-to-date review,” El Prof. Inf., vol. 29, no. 1, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.3145/epi.2020.ene.03.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  18. O. Ellegaard and J. A. Wallin, “The bibliometric analysis of scholarly production: How great is the impact?,” Scientometrics, vol. 105, no. 3, pp. 1809–1831, Dec. 2015, doi: 10.1007/s11192-015-1645-z.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  19. [C. Li, K. Wu, and J. Wu, “A bibliometric analysis of research on haze during 2000–2016,” Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., vol. 24, no. 32, pp. 24733–24742, Nov. 2017, doi: 10.1007/s11356-017-0440-1.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  20. N. Shafin et al., “Thematic analysis of multiple sclerosis research by enhanced strategic diagram,” Mult. Scler. J., vol. 28, no. 14, pp. 2160–2170, Dec. 2022, doi: 10.1177/13524585221075542.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  21. L. Gualtieri, I. Palomba, F. A. Merati, E. Rauch, and R. Vidoni, “Design of Human-Centered Collaborative Assembly Workstations for the Improvement of Operators’ Physical Ergonomics and Production Efficiency: A Case Study,” Sustainability, vol. 12, no. 9, p. 3606, Apr. 2020, doi: 10.3390/su12093606.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  22. I. El Makrini, G. Mathijssen, S. Verhaegen, T. Verstraten, and B. Vanderborght, “A Virtual Element-Based Postural Optimization Method for Improved Ergonomics During Human-Robot Collaboration,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 1772–1783, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.1109/TASE.2022.3147702.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  23. M. Omidi et al., “Improving Postural Ergonomics during Human–Robot Collaboration Using Particle Swarm Optimization: A Study in Virtual Environment,” Appl. Sci., vol. 13, no. 9, p. 5385, Apr. 2023, doi: 10.3390/app13095385.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  24. S. Proia, R. Carli, G. Cavone, and M. Dotoli, “Control Techniques for Safe, Ergonomic, and Efficient Human-Robot Collaboration in the Digital Industry: A Survey,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 1798–1819, Jul. 2022, doi: 10.1109/TASE.2021.3131011.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  25. A. Colim et al., “Lean Manufacturing and Ergonomics Integration: Defining Productivity and Wellbeing Indicators in a Human–Robot Workstation,” Sustainability, vol. 13, no. 4, p. 1931, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.3390/su13041931.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  26. N. Dimitropoulos, T. Togias, N. Zacharaki, G. Michalos, and S. Makris, “Seamless Human–Robot Collaborative Assembly Using Artificial Intelligence and Wearable Devices,” Appl. Sci., vol. 11, no. 12, p. 5699, Jun. 2021, doi: 10.3390/app11125699.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  27. S. Heydaryan, J. Suaza Bedolla, and G. Belingardi, “Safety Design and Development of a Human-Robot Collaboration Assembly Process in the Automotive Industry,” Appl. Sci., vol. 8, no. 3, p. 344, Feb. 2018, doi: 10.3390/app8030344.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  28. T. Maruyama et al., “Digital Twin-Driven Human Robot Collaboration Using a Digital Human,” Sensors, vol. 21, no. 24, p. 8266, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.3390/s21248266.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  29. B. Hasanain, “The Role of Ergonomic and Human Factors in Sustainable Manufacturing: A Review,” Machines, vol. 12, no. 3, p. 159, Feb. 2024, doi: 10.3390/machines12030159.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  30. M. Lagomarsino, M. Lorenzini, E. De Momi, and A. Ajoudani, “Robot Trajectory Adaptation to Optimise the Trade-off between Human Cognitive Ergonomics and Workplace Productivity in Collaborative Tasks,” 2022, doi: 10.48550/ARXIV.2207.03739.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  31. J. Hua, L. Zeng, G. Li, and Z. Ju, “Learning for a Robot: Deep Reinforcement Learning, Imitation Learning, Transfer Learning,” Sensors, vol. 21, no. 4, p. 1278, Feb. 2021, doi: 10.3390/s21041278.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  32. T. Davenport, A. Guha, D. Grewal, and T. Bressgott, “How artificial intelligence will change the future of marketing,” J. Acad. Mark. Sci., vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 24–42, Jan. 2020, doi: 10.1007/s11747-019-00696-0.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  33. A. O. Onososen and I. Musonda, “Ergonomics in construction robotics and human-robot teams in the AEC domain: a review,” IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci., vol. 1101, no. 5, p. 052003, Nov. 2022, doi: 10.1088/1755-1315/1101/5/052003.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  34. A. Hentout, M. Aouache, A. Maoudj, and I. Akli, “Human–robot interaction in industrial collaborative robotics: a literature review of the decade 2008–2017,” Adv. Robot., vol. 33, no. 15–16, pp. 764–799, Aug. 2019, doi: 10.1080/01691864.2019.1636714.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  35. G. D. M. Costa, M. R. Petry, and A. P. Moreira, “Augmented Reality for Human–Robot Collaboration and Cooperation in Industrial Applications: A Systematic Literature Review,” Sensors, vol. 22, no. 7, p. 2725, Apr. 2022, doi: 10.3390/s22072725.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
  36. M. J. Cobo, A. G. López-Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma, and F. Herrera, “An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research field: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory field,” J. Informetr., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 146–166, Jan. 2011, doi: 10.1016/j.joi.2010.10.002.DOI ↗Google Scholar ↗
Author details
Amanda Nur Cahyawati
Universitas Brawijaya, Departement of Industrial Engineering, Malang, East Java, 65145,
✉ Corresponding Author
👤 View Profile →
Sylvie Indah Kartika Sari
Universitas Brawijaya, Departement of Industrial Engineering, Malang, East Java, 65145,
👤 View Profile →🔗 Is this you? Claim this publication
Wisnu Wijayanto Putro
Universitas Brawijaya, Departement of Industrial Engineering, Malang, East Java, 65145,
👤 View Profile →🔗 Is this you? Claim this publication
Lina Dianati Fathimahhayati
UniversitasMulawarman, Departement of Industrial Engineering, Samarinda, East Kalimanta, 75119,
👤 View Profile →🔗 Is this you? Claim this publication