Tasks cards vs. reading aloud: Is there an optimal way to conduct knowledge tasks in HF research?

Tasks cards vs. reading aloud: Is there an optimal way to conduct knowledge tasks in human factors research?

Reflecting upon how updated human factors guidance and lessons learned as a consultant influence rigorous research

Introduction

More than 15 years after its original release, ANSI/AAMI HE75 was updated in November 2025. The revised guidance addresses the rapidly changing landscape of medical device development and provides much needed methodological considerations for accessibility, combination products, and, crucially, knowledge tasks.

I attended the HFES International Symposium on Human Factors and Ergonomics in Health Care this March in New York. It was evident that the updated guidance resonated with many attendees such as one of the podium presentations that spoke specifically about conducting knowledge tasks. After attending this presentation, I reflected on how knowledge tasks are conducted based on my previous experiences and current role as a human factors consultant. What I was really hoping to uncover was the “best” way to conduct knowledge tasks. Is there one? Should there be one? How do you know if what you’re doing is “right?” Here’s what it comes down to: run knowledge tasks when the situation calls for it, weigh your options carefully, and always keep your intended users in mind. Do that, and rigorous research will follow.

Definition of a knowledge task

A knowledge task is a method to evaluate a user’s comprehension of safety critical information and warnings. The information can be found via instructions for use, packaging, and quick start guides, among others. Furthermore, knowledge tasks are useful in determining if instructional materials, packaging, and other labeling are effective at communicating safety critical information and if there are gaps in training. Knowledge tasks are included as part of human factors testing since they cannot be easily observed during simulated use tasks. For instance, it may be difficult to notice if a participant checked the expiration date on a carton before opening it and administering medication. Usually, knowledge tasks are assessed after simulated use tasks to avoid biasing participants by having them view instructional materials in advance of assessing whether they can use a product effectively. Once a knowledge task is posed by the moderator, the participant will attempt to answer the question (“comprehension”) and can do so with (“perception”) or without the aid of testing materials (e.g., instructions for use).

Methods for conducting knowledge tasks

There are three ways to conduct knowledge tasks, and each has its own benefits and limitations.

- Read the knowledge task

The moderator reads the knowledge task question to the participant.

· The benefit: It maintains a natural, conversational flow and allows the participant to focus on the moderator.

· The limitation: The question can only be repeated a finite number of times (usually no more than twice). If the participant struggles, it is hard to tell in the moment if they are fatigued, hard of hearing, or simply don’t understand the question.

- Provide a task card with the knowledge task

The moderator provides a task card with the written knowledge task; the moderator does not read it.

· The benefit: Participants can independently read and review questions, which is particularly beneficial for lengthy or jargon-heavy tasks, such as those involving medical terminology.

· The limitation: There may be accessibility challenges for visually impaired participants and a potential focus on keyword matching rather than comprehension.

- Combination of reading the knowledge task and providing the task card

This combines the two methods with the moderator reading the knowledge task aloud and providing a supplemental task card.

· The benefit: This minimizes fatigue by delivering the task through multiple sensory channels and considers accessibility requirements for both visually and aurally impaired participants.

· The limitation: Simultaneous auditory and visual presentations can distract participants, leading to unfocused attention between the moderator and task card.

My recommended approach

Knowledge tasks are not about whether a participant can remember the question being asked; they are about comprehending and finding safety critical information and warnings. I have utilized all approaches for knowledge tasks based on participant needs, expectations from clients, and feedback from the FDA. As I have experimented with these approaches, I have favored the combined approach of the moderator reading the knowledge task and then providing a supplemental task card. This approach allows participants to absorb the knowledge task through multiple mediums, minimizes confusion on what is being asked, and reduces fatigue, particularly when there are more than 12–15 knowledge tasks. While I favor a combined approach, the right choice depends on the greater research objectives and the intended users.

Choosing the right fit

No knowledge task method is wrong; developing a knowledge task component to human factors testing is about ensuring participants can comprehend safety critical information and the correct number of knowledge tasks are included. As with any human factors study, there needs to be dialogue around the best approach within the context of the greater study and the intended users of the product under test.

I would love to hear how other human factors professionals are handling knowledge tasks. Do you prefer reading aloud, using task cards, or a hybrid approach? Why? Let me know in the comments!

Tasks cards vs. reading aloud: Is there an optimal way to conduct knowledge tasks in HF research? was originally published in Bootcamp on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.