As industries move towards greater integration of advanced robotics, the focus on human-centric approach promoted by Industry 5.0 becomes essential. One of the enabling technologies of Industry 5.0 is collaborative robotics. Nevertheless, the literature indicates that the aspect of the application of Human Factors/Ergonomics (HFE), in industrial collaborative robotics is an emerging and not yet consolidated research topic. For this reason, the aim of this research is to explore the current state of the art regarding the application of Human Factors/Ergonomics (HFE) in the design and management of human-robot collaborative (HRC) workstations in the manufacturing industry adopting the Industry 5.0 approach. A systematic literature review was conducted identifying a total of forty scientific journal articles that met the established inclusion criteria. It was found that the main research topics addressed by the reviewed literature are: Factors influencing the acceptance of cobots by human coworkers and managers, Methodologies and tools used for ergonomics assessment in HRC systems, Task allocation strategies, Technical and ethical guidelines for the design of HRC workstations, and Sustainability assessment in HRC configurations. All the findings of this study have been meticulously presented and discussed, and it is expected that they can guide academics and practitioners in designing and managing HRC workstations to make them more human-centered, sustainable, resilient, and efficient. The value of this article lies in the fact that the results have been analyzed from an industrial engineering perspective and can serve as a complement to studies on the subject carried out by robotics specialists.

1.         Breque M, De Nul L, Petridis A. Industry 5.0: towards a sustainable, human-centric and resilient European industry. Luxembourg: European Commission, Directorate-General for Research and Innovation; 2021.

2.         Müller J. Enabling technologies for Industry 5.0. European Commission. 2020: 8–10. doi: 10.2777/082634

3.         Gualtieri L, Palomba I, Merati F A, et al. Design of human-centered collaborative assembly workstations for the improvement of operators’ physical ergonomics and production efficiency: A case study. Sustainability. 2020; 12(9): 3606. doi: 10.3390/su1213606

4.         International Ergonomics Association. Principles and Guidelines for Human Factors. Ergonomics (HF/E) Design and Management of Work Systems. IEA; 2020.

5.         Ranavolo A, Ajoudani A, Cherubini A, et al. The sensor-based biomechanical risk assessment at the base of the need for revising of standards for human ergonomics. Sensors. 2020; 20(20): 5750. doi:10.3390/s20205750

6.         Cherubini A, Passama R, Crosnier A, et al. Collaborative manufacturing with physical human-robot interaction. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing. 2016; 40: 1–13. doi: 10.1016/j.rcim.2015.12.007

7.         Cardoso A, Colim A, Bicho E, et al. Ergonomics and human factors as a requirement to implement safer collaborative robotic workstations: A literature review. Safety. 2021; 7(4): 71.doi:10.3390/safety7040071

8.         Zakeri Z, Arif A, Omurtag A, et al. Multimodal assessment of cognitive workload using neural, subjective and behavioural measures in smart factory settings. Sensors. 2023; 23(21): 8926. doi: 10.3390/s23218926

9.         Gualtieri L, Rauch E, Vidoni R. Emerging research fields in safety and ergonomics in industrial collaborative robotics: a systematic literature review. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing. 2021; 67: 101998. doi: 10.1016/j.rcim.2020.101998

10.      Panagou S, Neumann WP, Fruggiero F. A scoping review of human robot interaction research towards Industry 5.0 human-centric workplaces. International Journal of Production Research. 2024; 62(3): 974–990. doi: 10.1080/00207543.2023.2222222

11.      International Organization for Standardization. ISO 9241-11:2018 Ergonomics of human-system interaction – Part 11: Usability: Definitions and concepts. Geneva: ISO; 2018.

12.      International Ergonomics Association. What is Ergonomics (HF/E)? International Ergonomics Association; 2025.

13.      Lorenzini M, Lagomarsino M, Fortini L, et al. Ergonomic human-robot collaboration in industry: A review. Frontiers in Robotics and AI. 2023; 9: 813907. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2022.813907

14.      Colim A, Faria C, Braga A C, et al. Towards an ergonomic assessment framework for industrial assembly workstations—A case study. Applied Sciences. 2020; 10(9): 3048. doi: 10.3390/app10093048

15.      Paas F, Renkl A, Sweller J. Cognitive load theory and instructional design: recent developments. Educational Psychology. 2003; 38(1): 1–4. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3801_1

16.      Burdorf A. Exposure assessment of risk factors for disorders of the back in occupational epidemiology. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health. 1992; 18(1): 1–9. doi: 10.5271/sjweh.1628

17.      Van Der Beek AJ, Frings-Dresen MH. Assessment of mechanical exposure in ergonomic epidemiology. Occupational and Environmental Medicine. 1998; 55(5): 291–299. doi: 10.1136/oem.55.5.291

18.      Winkel J, Mathiassen SE. Assessment of physical workload in epidemiologic studies: concepts, issues and operational considerations. Ergonomics. 1994; 37(6): 979–988. doi: 10.1080/00140139408963693

19.      Westgaard RH, Winkel J. Guidelines for occupational musculoskeletal load as a basis for intervention: A critical review. Applied Ergonomics. 1996; 27(2): 79–88. doi: 10.1016/0003-6870(95)00072-0

20.      Gilchrist A. Industry 4.0: the industrial internet of things. New York: Apress; 2016. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4842-2047-4

21.      Nahavandi S. Industry 5.0—a human-centric solution. Sustainability. 2019; 11(16): 4371. doi: 10.3390/su11164371

22.      Caiazzo C, Savkovic M, Pusica M, et al. Development of a neuroergonomic assessment for the evaluation of mental workload in an industrial human–robot interaction assembly task: A comparative case study. Machines. 2023; 11(11): 995. doi: 10.3390/machines11110995

23.      Siciliano B, Khatib O, Kröger T, et al. Springer Handbook of Robotics. Cham: Springer; 2016. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-32552-1

24.      Dobra Z, Dhir KS. Technology jump in the industry: human-robot cooperation in production. Industrial Robot: The International Journal of Robotics Research and Application. 2020; 47(6): 757–775. doi: 10.1108/IR-01-2020-0010

25.      Ibáñez VR, Pujol F, Ortega SG, Perpiñán JS. Collaborative robotics in wire harnesses spot taping process. Computers in Industry. 2021; 125: 103370. doi: 10.1016/j.compind.2020.103370

26.      Villani V, Pini F, Leali F, Secchi C. Survey on human–robot collaboration in industrial settings: safety, intuitive interfaces and applications. Mechatronics. 2018; 55: 248–266. doi: 10.1016/j.mechatronics.2018.02.009

27.      Bogataj D, Battini D, Calzavara M, Persona A. The ageing workforce challenge: investments in collaborative robots or contribution to pension schemes, from the multi-echelon perspective. International Journal of Production Economics. 2019; 210: 97–106. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.01.023

28.      Borboni A, Reddy KVV, Elamvazuthi I, et al. The expanding role of artificial intelligence in collaborative robots for industrial applications: A systematic review of recent works. Machines. 2023; 11(1): 111. doi:10.3390/machines11010111

29.      Kakade A. Optimizing performance and agility through intelligent automation strategies. International Numeric Journal of Machine Learning and Robots. 2023; 7: 1–10.

30.      Zafar MH, Langås EF, Sanfilippo F. Exploring the synergies between collaborative robotics, digital twins, augmentation, and industry 5.0 for smart manufacturing: A state-of-the-art review. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing. 2024; 89: 102769. doi: 10.1016/j.rcim.2023.102769

31.      Baskaran P, Adams JA. Multi-dimensional task recognition for human-robot teaming: literature review. Frontiers in Robotics and AI. 2023; 10: 1123374. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2023.1123374

32.      Rahman MM, Khatun F, Jahan I, et al. Cobotics: The evolving roles and prospects of next-generation collaborative robots in Industry 5.0. Journal of Robotics. 2024; 2024(1): 2918089. doi: 10.1155/2024/2918089

33.      Córdova-Aguirre LJ, Ramón-Jerónimo JM. Designing a sustainability assessment framework for Peruvian manufacturing small and medium enterprises applying the stakeholder theory approach. Sustainability. 2024; 16(5): 1853. doi: 10.3390/su16051853

34.      Alvarez Jaramillo J, Zartha Sossa JW, Orozco Mendoza GL. Barriers to sustainability for small and medium enterprises in the framework of sustainable development: literature review. Business Strategy and the Environment. 2019; 28(4): 512–524. doi:10.1002/bse.2261

35.      Delbufalo E. Outcomes of inter-organizational trust in supply chain relationships: a systematic literature review and a meta-analysis of the empirical evidence. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal. 2012; 17(4): 377–402. doi: 10.1108/13598541211246549

36.      Sivarajah U, Kamal MM, Irani Z, Weerakkody V. Critical analysis of big data challenges and analytical methods. Journal of Business Research. 2017; 70: 263–286. doi: 10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.001

37.      Tranfield D, Denyer D, Smart P. Towards a methodology for developing evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic review. British Journal of Management. 2003; 14: 207–222. doi: 10.1111/1467-8551.00375

38.      Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas. Revista Española de Cardiología. 2021; 74(9): 790–799. doi: 10.1016/j.recesp.2021.06.016

39.      Prassida GF, Asfari U. A conceptual model for the acceptance of collaborative robots in Industry 5.0. Procedia Computer Science. 2022; 197: 61–67. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2021.12.120

40.      Simões AC, Soares AL, Barros AC. Factors influencing the intention of managers to adopt collaborative robots (cobots) in manufacturing organizations. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management. 2020; 57: 101574. doi: 10.1016/j.jengtecman.2020.101574

41.      Longo F, Padovano A, Umbrello S. Value-oriented and ethical technology engineering in Industry 5.0: A human-centric perspective for the design of the factory of the future. Applied Sciences. 2020; 10(12): 4182. doi: 10.3390/app10124182

42.      Liao S, Lin L, Chen Q. Research on the acceptance of collaborative robots for the Industry 5.0 era, the mediating effect of perceived competence and the moderating effect of robot use self-efficacy. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics. 2023; 95: 103455. doi: 10.1016/j.ergon.2023.103455

43.      Calzavara M, Faccio M, Granata I. Multi-objective task allocation for collaborative robot systems with an Industry 5.0 human-centered perspective. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 2023; 128(1–2): 297–314. doi: 10.1007/s00170-023-11667-8

44.      Granata I, Faccio M, Boschetti G. Industry 5.0: Prioritizing human comfort and productivity through collaborative robots and dynamic task allocation. Procedia Computer Science. 2024; 232: 2137–2146. doi: 10.1016/j.procs.2024.03.256

45.      Mourtzis D, Angelopoulos J, Panopoulos N. The future of the human–machine interface (HMI) in society 5.0. Future Internet. 2023; 15(5): 162. doi: 10.3390/fi15050162

46.      Navas-Reascos GE, Romero D, Rodriguez CA, et al. Wire harness assembly process supported by a collaborative robot: a case study focus on ergonomics. Robotics. 2022; 11(131). doi: 10.3390/robotics11060131

47.      Bonello A, Francalanza E, Refalo P. Smart and sustainable human-centred workstations for operators with disability in the age of Industry 5.0: A systematic review. Sustainability. 2024; 16(1): 281. doi: 10.3390/su16010281

48.      Alves J, Lima TM, Gaspar PD. Is Industry 5.0 a human-centred approach? A systematic review. Processes. 2023; 11(1): 193. doi: 10.3390/pr11010193

49.      Abdulazeem N, Hu Y. Human factors considerations for quantifiable human states in physical human–robot interaction: a literature review. Sensors. 2023; 23(17): 7381. doi: 10.3390/s23177381

50.      Messeri C, Masotti G, Zanchettin AM, Rocco P. Human-robot collaboration: optimizing stress and productivity based on game theory. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters. 2021; 6(4): 8061–8068. doi: 10.1109/LRA.2021.3094052

51.      Ferraguti F, Villa R, Landi CT, et al. A unified architecture for physical and ergonomic human–robot collaboration. Robotica. 2020; 38(4): 669–683. doi: 10.1017/S0263574719000893

52.      Lagomarsino M, Lorenzini M, De Momi E, Ajoudani A. An online framework for cognitive load assessment in assembly tasks. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing. 2022; 78: 102382. doi: 10.1016/j.rcim.2022.102382

53.      Lorenzini M, Kim W, Ajoudani A. An online multi-index approach to human ergonomics assessment in the workplace. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems. 2022; 52(5): 812–823. doi: 10.1109/THMS.2022.3162339

54.      Keshvarparast A, Berti N, Chand S, et al. Ergonomic design of human-robot collaborative workstation in the era of Industry 5.0. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 2024; 198: 110729. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2024.110729

55.      Fu Y, Lu W, Chen J. A virtual reality-based ergonomic assessment approach for human-robot collaboration workstation design in modular construction manufacturing. Advanced Engineering Informatics. 2025; 64: 103054. doi: 10.1016/j.aei.2025.103054

56.      Kneževic N, Savić A, Gordić Z, et al. Toward Industry 5.0: A neuroergonomic workstation for a human-centered, collaborative robot-supported manual assembly process. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine. 2024; 31(3): 92–104. doi: 10.1109/MRA.2024.3381234

57.      Calzavara M, Faccio M, Granata I, Trevisani A. Achieving productivity and operator well-being: A dynamic task allocation strategy for collaborative assembly systems in Industry 5.0. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. 2024; 134(7): 3201–3216. doi: 10.1007/s00170-024-12345-6

58.      Gualtieri L, Fraboni F, Brendel H, et al. Updating design guidelines for cognitive ergonomics in human-centred collaborative robotics applications: An expert survey. Applied Ergonomics. 2024; 117: 104246. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2024.104246

59.      Cardoso A, Colim A, Bicho E, et al. A novel human-centered methodology for assessing manual-to-collaborative safe conversion of workstations. Safety Science. 2025; 181: 106685. doi: 10.1016/j.ssci.2024.106685

60.      Keshvarparast A, Battini D, Battaia O, Pirayesh A. Collaborative robots in manufacturing and assembly systems: Literature review and future research agenda. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. 2024; 35(5): 2065–2118. doi: 10.1007/s10845-023-02045-9

61.      Chand S, McDaid A, Lu Y. Dynamic muscle fatigue assessment using s-EMG technology towards human-centric human-robot collaboration. Journal of Manufacturing Systems. 2023; 68: 508–522. doi: 10.1016/j.jmsy.2023.05.004

62.      Pietrantoni L, Favilla M, Fraboni F, et al. Integrating collaborative robots in manufacturing, logistics, and agriculture: expert perspectives on technical, safety, and human factors. Frontiers in Robotics and AI. 2024; 11: 1342130. doi: 10.3389/frobt.2024.1342130

63.      Lu Y, Zheng H, Chand S, et al. Outlook on human-centric manufacturing towards Industry 5.0. Journal of Manufacturing Systems. 2022; 62: 612–627. doi: 10.1016/j.jmsy.2021.10.006

64.      Loizaga E, Eyam AT, Bastida L. A comprehensive study of human factors, sensory principles, and commercial solutions for future human-centered working operations in Industry 5.0. IEEE Access. 2023; 11: 53806–53829. doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3281234

65.      Eyam AT, Mohammed WM, Martinez Lastra JL. Emotion-driven analysis and control of human-robot interactions in collaborative applications. Sensors. 2021; 21(14): 4626. doi: 10.3390/s21144626

66.      Falerni MM, Pomponi V, Karimi HR, et al. A framework for human–robot collaboration enhanced by preference learning and ergonomics. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing. 2024; 89: 102781. doi: 10.1016/j.rcim.2023.102781

67.      Rinaldi M, Caterino M, Fera M. Sustainability of human-robot cooperative configurations: findings from a case study. Computers & Industrial Engineering. 2023; 182: 109383. doi: 10.1016/j.cie.2023.109383

68.      Panchetti T, Pietrantoni L, Puzzo G, et al. Assessing the relationship between cognitive workload, workstation design, user acceptance and trust in collaborative robots. Applied Ergonomics. 2023; 13(3): 1720. doi: 10.3390/app13031720

69.      Anacleto Filho PC, Colim A, Cristiano J, et al. Digital and virtual technologies for work-related biomechanical risk assessment: A scoping review. Safety. 2024; 10(3): 79. doi: 10.3390/safety10030079