Human Factors in the Maritime Domain

De Danske Seariders’ Træning af Søværnets Besætninger: Et Studie af Interaktion, Roller og Dilemmaer

“…En del bøger og artikler beskaeftiger sig dog med 'human factors' betydning for maritim sikkerhedskultur og militaer scenarietraening, men 'human factors'-tilgangen er begraenset i den forstand, at der fokuseres bredt på ikke-tekniske faerdigheder (nontechnical skills) og mindre på effekterne af den situerede interaktion. Forfatterne har ikke kunnet finde human factor-studier, der anskuer militaer maritim scenarietraening ud fra et mikrosociologisk perspektiv (Hancock et al 2008;Fjeld, Tvedt & Oltedal 2018;Barnett, Gatfield & Pekcan 2006;Cavaleiro, Gomes & Lopes 2020;Grech, Horberry & Koester 2008). Bailey, Housley og Belcher (2017) har dog produceret et interessant kommunikations-og interaktionsstudie af broteams på civile handelsskibe, som traekker på Goffmans teoriapparat, herunder rollebegrebet.…”

Comparison between simulation and conventional training: Expanding the concept of social fidelity

“…Simulator training has been a part of the aviation industry in order to improve crew skills and decision‐making 2 . The Maritime industry started using a similar approach, that is, simulator‐based training, in the 1990s after several accidents were caused by human error 3 . Simulator‐based training and its history in providing opportunities for training in all crucial professions such as marine, aviation, and healthcare in a safer environment have surfaced due to the low‐risk factor 4 .…”

What is maritime navigation? Unfolding the complexity of a Sociotechnical System

“… Address the complexity of the maritime STS;  Provide a high level interpretive framework to make sense of interactions and information;  Explore and understand maritime navigation;  Characterize variables in navigation performance, regarding the perception of safety and risks;  Frame existing wide-ranging theories. Unsafe practices, in critical systems, have been related to: overreliance on automation, over-confidence in represented data, lack of understanding of inherent weaknesses of automated systems, ergonomic design issues, human-computer interface, development and maintenance of situation awareness, and information overload (Bainbridge, 1983;Grech, Horberry, & Koester, 2008;IMO, 2006;Parasuraman, Molloy, & Singh, 1993;Parasuraman & Riley, 1997). Moreover, human factors don't lie solely at the sharp end of the system, it comprises larger influential context domains, thereby forming a complex STS (Flach, 2012;Hetherington, Flin, & Mearns, 2006;Perrow, 1999;Vicente, 2004).…”

“…They also address safety in their own perspective, which is managed and controlled by Joint Cognitive Systems (Hollnagel & Woods, 2005), planned in accordance to their goals, needs and regulations (Mikkers, Henriqson, & Dekker, 2013;Praetorius & Lützhöft, 2011). Thus, dealing with safety becomes a continuous risk assessment exercise undertaken in a STS, comprising several complex interactions (Grech et al, 2008;Rasmussen, 1997). The complexity of maritime navigation can be idealized by noticing the network of the various stakeholders involved in different dimensions, like education, practitioners, technology, operators, policy, organizational, social and cultural factors, among others.…”