2018
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0207439
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Does effective gaze behavior lead to enhanced performance in a complex error-detection cockpit task?

Abstract: The purpose of the current study was to examine the relationship between expertise, performance, and gaze behavior in a complex error-detection cockpit task. Twenty-four pilots and 26 non-pilots viewed video-clips from a pilot’s viewpoint and were asked to detect malfunctions in the cockpit instrument panel. Compared to non-pilots, pilots detected more malfunctioning instruments, had shorter dwell times on the instruments, made more transitions, visited task-relevant areas more often, and dwelled longer on the… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
20
0
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 75 publications
3
20
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…While pilots can actively hide task-redundant instruments in trained routines (the exact method of scanning the instrument panel varies between pilots, but some basic features common to a "good" scan pattern are available), the reduction of complexity is much more difficult for teachers in the present study's assessment situation. Aircraft instruments are static, standardized, and a priority ranking in their importance can be made (Brams et al, 2018). On the other hand, teachers in our study had to observe several students simultaneously who acted dynamically and were asked to judge personal traits that are not readily identifiable -blinding out individual students might be much more complicated than instruments that are not required for the correct assessment (i.e., landing a plane).…”
Section: Teachers' Scanpaths Are Idiosyncratic and Driven By Expertisementioning
confidence: 99%
“…While pilots can actively hide task-redundant instruments in trained routines (the exact method of scanning the instrument panel varies between pilots, but some basic features common to a "good" scan pattern are available), the reduction of complexity is much more difficult for teachers in the present study's assessment situation. Aircraft instruments are static, standardized, and a priority ranking in their importance can be made (Brams et al, 2018). On the other hand, teachers in our study had to observe several students simultaneously who acted dynamically and were asked to judge personal traits that are not readily identifiable -blinding out individual students might be much more complicated than instruments that are not required for the correct assessment (i.e., landing a plane).…”
Section: Teachers' Scanpaths Are Idiosyncratic and Driven By Expertisementioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, some contradictory findings about the relationship between scan pattern systematicity and expertise can be found in the literature. For example, in a study comparing visual search in aircraft pilots with nonpilots while completing a cockpit task, no higher systematicity in visual scanning was observed in the pilots compared with the nonpilots (Brams et al, 2018). In general, the relationship between scan pattern systematicity and expertise is rarely analyzed, and it may be an important measure in various expertise domains (Brams et al, 2019).…”
Section: Systematic Scan Patterns As Indicators For Experience and Superior Perceptual-cognitive Skills In Radiologymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We used entropy to indicate systematicity of the scan pattern, which was calculated according to the method of Allsop and Gray (2014). The method is based on a transition matrix indicating the chance that the participant's fixation will move from one specific AOI to another specific AOI in a particular order (see Allsop & Gray, 2014;Brams et al, 2018).…”
Section: Dependent Variables and Data Processingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Expert pilots tend to have more well defined scan patterns than novices (Kasarskis, Stehwien, Hickox, & Aretz, 2001), however, unlike in sports, chess and medicine, aviation experts tend to have shorter dwell times, and more eye movements, compared to novices or non-pilots (e.g. Bellenkes, Wickens, & Kramer, 1997;Brams et al, 2018;Kasarskis et al, 2001;Xiong et al, 2016). These inconsistencies could be an effect of task type.…”
Section: Eye Tracking Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, it was only recently that this theory was re-examined, with the authors finding expert pilots to have a greater proportion of fixations in-between main AOIs compared to non-pilots, and a shorter duration between the appearance of, and subsequent identification of, an error on one of the cockpit instruments. Both of these findings were put down to expert pilots having a larger visual span than novices (Brams et al, 2018). If expert pilots do have a larger perceptual span, they may have a disproportionate impediment when faced with using a HMD (VR) due to the restricted FOV issue previously mentioned.…”
Section: Perceptual Span and Expertisementioning
confidence: 97%