Comparison of four different backpacks intended for school use

被引:31
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 26 条
[1]   POSTURAL ADJUSTMENTS WHILE STANDING WITH 2 TYPES OF LOADED BACKPACK [J].
BLOOM, D ;
WOODHULLMCNEAL, AP .
ERGONOMICS, 1987, 30 (10) :1425-1430
[2]   EFFECT OF MAILBAG DESIGN ON MUSCULOSKELETAL FATIGUE AND METABOLIC LOAD [J].
BLOSWICK, DS ;
GERBER, A ;
SEBESTA, D ;
JOHNSON, S ;
MECHAM, W .
HUMAN FACTORS, 1994, 36 (02) :210-218
[3]   EFFECTS OF LOAD PLACEMENT ON BACK MUSCLE-ACTIVITY IN LOAD CARRIAGE [J].
BOBET, J ;
NORMAN, RW .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY AND OCCUPATIONAL PHYSIOLOGY, 1984, 53 (01) :71-75
[4]  
BORG G, 1970, Scandinavian Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, V2, P92
[5]  
BYGRAVE S, 2003, EFFECT BACKPACK FIT
[6]  
CHEUNG HY, 2001, 18 INT S BIOM SPORT
[7]   TECHNIQUE FOR ASSESSING POSTURAL DISCOMFORT [J].
CORLETT, EN ;
BISHOP, RP .
ERGONOMICS, 1976, 19 (02) :175-182
[8]  
CRUZ CO, 2003, IN PRESS ERGONOMICS
[9]  
FRYKMAN PN, 1994, MED SCI SPORTS EXERC, V26, P140
[10]  
GERBER AH, 1992, ADV IND ERGONOMICS S, V4