Pros and Cons of Physiological Measures, Behavioral Assessments, and Self-Report Measures of
Pain
Physiological measures have increasingly gained popularity as one of the most suitable
approaches in the assessment of pain. Physiological measures are not limited to inherent
constraints that are characterized by self-report and behavioral assessments and measurements of
performance modelling (Brannon, Updegraff & Feist, 2018). In the latter subjective approaches,
participants quantify their workload experiences immediately after finishing the task or during
the task. This paper describes the advantages and disadvantages of physiological measures, self-
report measures and behavioral assessments of pain.
The advantages of physiological measures include assisting in the provision of essential
data that can help system designers face and address upcoming challenges. Secondly, the non-
obstructive physiological approaches used for examining physiological demands on an individual
A newly formulated framework can overcome some of the challenges characterized by
contemporary risk methodologies used to design the next generation control centers (Tran,
Boring & Dudenhoeffe, 2007). Additionally, these approaches do not only provide real-time
analysis of risks, but they also offer relatively precise results when determining the problematic
design of an issue. Furthermore, using this technique extends the cutting-edge human
reliability strategies from a somewhat static to an elastic measure. Last but not least, the method
enables designers to examine and stimulate the peril of the configurations of different human
systems.
On the contrary, some of the disadvantages of physiological measures include low
precision, overwhelming data analysis, and lack of practical applications. Although the overall
Although the accuracy of physiological means of analyzing pain is improving, it still does not qualify to be
considered accurate. Research shows that the relative level of precision of using this method
ranges between 70% and 80%; hence, this method should always be used in unison with traditional
behavioral assessment measures (Tran, Boring & Dudenhoeffe, 2007). Secondly, the technology
of physiological measures has not yet gotten to the point where physiological measures can be
used under operational conditions in a practical application because of its long-term comfort and
usability.
The pros of behavioral and self-report measures of pain include offering of insightful
look, providing an objective comparison, and serving as tools for following up questions. Self-
report and behavioral assessment are not precise but can present an exact profile of behavioral or
personality traits of an individual (Brannon, Updegraff, & Feist, 2018). Secondly, the two
approaches are metric and present clear and clean feedback. They are also objective tools, which
can be used to compare all participants as opposed to subjective interviews, which are subject- and
characterized by interviewers’ bias. Thirdly, depending on the stage at which the assessment is
assimilated into the study, behavioral and self-report measures can be useful in viewing the findings
of analysis before the final interviews.
However, behavioral and self-report measures also have some limitations. Firstly, these
approaches are now widely used to compensate for people’s weaknesses. Many people have
devised tricks to offset their weak personality traits and behavior by extrapolating themselves
(Tran, Boring & Dudenhoeffe, 2007). However, behavioral and self-report measures do not
reflect the compensating or stretching that individuals have adopted. Secondly, behavioral and
self-report measures thrive on a narrative that obliviates weaknesses in humanity (Brannon,
Updegraff & Feist, 2018). They tend to focus on the positive aspects of life. This, in effect, fails
to bring out the perfect nature of a person which always consists of a blend of strengths
and limitations.
Brannon, L., Updegraff, J., & Feist, J. (2018). Health Psychology: An Introduction to Behavior
and Health (9th ed.). Boston: Cengage Learning.
Tran, T., Boring, R., & Dudenhoeffe, D. (2007). Advantages and Disadvantages of Physiological
Assessment for Next Generation Control Room Design. Washington, D.C.: United States.
Office of Nuclear Energy, Science, and Technology.
