Abstract
Abstract. This project aimed to understand rapid crew transitions from a monitoring to a decision-making role, when asserting manual control of aircraft subsystems. Ten crews unknowingly flew a semicritical failure scenario in a full flight simulator, forcing several crew decision moments. Observations of automation-related (diagnostic) behavior were correlated with respective flight performance, revealing that specific competencies (related to knowledge, procedures, attitude toward automation, and teamwork) with automated systems led to significant performance gains. More importantly, the absence of these behaviors severely deteriorated performance and should not be underestimated in its potency to affect flight safety. These findings may form a foundation for developing and evaluating near-future innovations in training, operations, and automation design, which could prove critical toward improving future accident rates.
References
(1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.
(2012). Crew schedules, sleep deprivation, and aviation performance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 85–89.
(1999, September). Situation awareness and procedure following, Paper presented at the Seventh European Conference on Cognitive Science Approaches to Process Control (CSAPC’99), Villeneuve d’Ascq, France: European Association of Cognitive Ergonomics.
(2013). Annual safety review 2013, Retrieved from http://www.easa.europa.eu
(1997). Situation awareness information dominance & information warfare. Dayton, OH: Logicon Technical Services.
(1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 37, 32–64.
(2011). Predicting and changing behavior: The reasoned action approach. New York: Taylor & Francis.
(2014). Project samurai pilot. Cognitive enhancement of airline pilots with biofeedback training. Delft, Leiden: Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Aerospace Engineering, and University of Leiden, Faculty of Psychology.
(2006).
NASA-task load index (NASA-TLX): 20 years later . In HFESEd., Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 50, No. 9. pp. 904–908). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.(2002).
Understanding accidents: From root causes to performance variability . In IEEEEd., Human factors and power plants, 2002. Proceedings of the 2002 IEEE 7th Conference (pp. 1–6). New York: IEEE.(2005). Joint cognitive systems: Foundations of cognitive systems engineering. London: CRC Press.
(2011). The views from an aircraft manufacturer: What have we learned?, Retrieved from http://www.enco.eu/Safetyworkshop/Malinge_Airbus_presentation%20handout.pdf
(2012). Human performance consequences of automated decision aids: The impact of degree of automation and system experience. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 6, 57–87. doi: 10.1177/1555343411433844
(2012). Measuring fatigue: ICAO Asia-Pacific FRMS seminar 2012, Retrieved from http://www.icao.int/safety/fatiguemanagement/FRMSBangkok/4.%20Measuring%20Fatigue.pdf
(2013). Investigating flight crew recovery capabilities from system failures in highly automated fourth generation aircraft (NLR-TR-2013-574). Amsterdam: National Aerospace Laboratory [Restricted distribution: Contact the author for a copy: frederik.
mohrmann@nlr. nl] (1998). Automation bias: Decision making and performance in high-tech cockpits. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 8, 47–63.
(1998). Errors in aviation decision making: Bad decisions or bad luck? Moffett Field, CA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Ames Research Center.
(2012). D1.1 literature review, (Technical report, Man4Gen Consortium). Retrieved from http://www.man4gen.eu
(2013). “Staying ahead of the aircraft” and managing surprise in modern airliners (NLR-TP-2013-230). Amsterdam: National Aerospace Laboratory.
(1983). Skills, rules, and knowledge; signals, signs, and symbols, and other distinctions in human performance models. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, IEEE Transactions, 3, 257–266.
(2004). Flight crew reliance on automation (CAA Paper 2004/10). Gatwick Airport South, UK: Civil Aviation Authority.
