Shared Information Between Pilots and Controllers in Tactical Air Traffic Control

Farley, Todd; Hansman, R. John; Amonlirdviman, Keith; Endsley, Mica R.

doi:10.2514/2.4644

Cited by 17 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Mitigation strategies begin with an understanding of SA requirements and range from better design to better training and selection. Farley et al, 2000;Endsley et al, 1997;Hormann et al, 2004Carretta et al, 1996 and flight/aviation Jennings et al, 2004;Remington et al, 2000Gopher, 1982O'Hare, Olmos et al, 2000Roscoe, 1997Driving Reagan et al, 2004Drews et al, 2004Fisher et al, 2004McCarley & Vais, 2004Strayer et al, 2004Infantry Strater et al, 2004 Groupware Gutwin & Greenberg, 2002 Medical and Gorman et al, 2000;Michels et al, 1997Guerlain et al, 2005 medical dispatch Wong & Blandford, 2004Robotics Casper & Murphy, 2003Scholtz et al, 2004…”

Section: So What?mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although pilots have typically deferred to controllers on issues of traffic, and controllers have deferred to pilots on issues of weather, the duplication of information through datalink could change these dynamics, possibly even introducing contention. Farley, Hansman, Amonlirdviman, and Endsley (2000) investigated these issues in a study of datalink. Six controllers were paired with six pilots in a part-task simulator that enabled the members of each pair to interact with each other from a different room, as well as with simulated pilots.…”

Section: Technology To Enhance Samentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Situation Awareness Catches On: What? So What? Now What?

Tenney¹,

Pew²

2006

Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human factors/ergonomics professionals regularly study the situation awareness (SA) problems of pilots, air traffic controllers, automobile drivers, power plant workers, ambulance dispatchers, urban search and rescue professionals, and unmanned vehicle operators, to mention a few. The challenge has been to define SA operationally and devise measurement strategies that focus on attention and recall on the one hand and relevant actions on the other. Although there have been many successes, challenges remain. This review is organized in three parts. Under "What?" we discuss definitions of SA, their interpretations in terms of human information processing and ecological psychological theories, as well as techniques for measuring SA. Under "So what?" we introduce SA applications-information requirements, technological tools, and training systems-that support the way people work and live. Finally, under "Now what?" we discuss future directions for SA research. Table 1.1. Two Theoretical Views of Situation Awareness Aspect Information Processing Ecological Psychology Emphasis "What's inside your head" "What your head's inside of" (Mace, 1977) Key ideas for SA Mental representation, Direct perception, affordances of long-term working memory objects, events [and situations] Goal of research Diagnostics-what is noticed and Adaptation-how does organism remembered; what is overlooked learn to distinguish situations and their action implications? Nature of stimulation Sensation-based, elemental Rich, nested structure, invariants over time and space Meaning and action Derived from memory, knowledge, Perceived directly as affordances potential inference of objects and events Sources: Neisser (1967), Gibson (1979).

show abstract

Section: So What?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Technology To Enhance Samentioning

confidence: 99%

Situation Awareness Catches On: What? So What? Now What?

Tenney¹,

Pew²

2006

Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, process measures are inadequate for measuring SA on their own. Other researchers have focused on trying to infer whether or not people have good SA based on their actions and performance; however, this approach can be severely hampered when people do not act as expected (Farley, Hansman, Amonlirdviman, & Endsley, 2000;Jones & Endsley, 2000b;Pritchett, Hansman, & Johnson, 1995). While collecting data on performance is always desirable, the main limitation of this class of measures is that it only infers SA indirectly, in what can be a circular argument, without providing sufficient detail or diagnosticity on what the operator really thought was going on.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Direct Objective Measures of Situation Awareness: A Comparison of SAGAT and SPAM

2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To examine evidence of sensitivity, predictiveness, and methodological concerns regarding direct, objective measures of situation awareness (SA). Background: The ability to objectively measure SA is important to the evaluation of user interfaces and displays, training programs, and automation initiatives, as well as for studies that seek to better understand SA in both individuals and teams. A number of methodological criticisms have been raised creating significant confusion in the research field. Method: A meta-analysis of 243 studies was conducted to examine evidence of sensitivity and predictiveness, and to address methodological questions regarding Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique (SAGAT), Situation Present Assessment Technique (SPAM), and their variants. Results: SAGAT and SPAM were found to be equally predictive of performance. SPAM (64%) and real-time probes (73%) were found to have significantly lower sensitivity in comparison to SAGAT (94%). While SAGAT was found not to be overly memory reliant nor intrusive into operator performance, SPAM resulted in problems with intrusiveness in 40% of the studies examined, as well as problems with speed-accuracy tradeoffs, sampling bias, and confounds with workload. Concerns about memory reliance, the utility of these measures for assessing Team SA, and other issues are also addressed. Conclusion: SAGAT was found to be a highly sensitive, reliable, and predictive measure of SA that is useful across a wide variety of domains and experimental settings. Application: Direct, objective SA measurement provides useful and diagnostic insights for research and design in a wide variety of domains and study objectives.

show abstract

“…Endsley's shared SA view also has an abundance of supporting research and has been applied in a wide variety of domains, including aviation maintenance (Endsley and Robertson 2000), the military (e.g. Jones 1997, Riley et al 2006), aviation and air traffic control (Farley et al 2000) and process control (Kaber and Endsley 1998), to name only a few.…”

Section: Theoretical Issues In Ergonomics Science 51mentioning

confidence: 98%

Genotype and phenotype schemata and their role in distributed situation awareness in collaborative systems

Stanton

Salmon

Walker

et al. 2009

Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Situation awareness (SA) is a critical commodity for teams working in complex systems. This article builds on existing schema theory to postulate an explanation of how teams develop and maintain SA during collaborative activities. The perceptual-action cycle approach and schema theory are used to formulate a model of distributed SA. Extracts from a case study undertaken in the UK energy distribution domain are used to demonstrate the concept of genotype and phenotype schemata as distributed SA. The sub-concepts of compatible and transactive SA are also outlined and explored via the case study. The differences between this perspective and the more commonly cited 'shared SA' perspective is articulated. In conclusion, whilst the ideas presented in this article are quite different to those expressed by the dominant models of individual and team SA presented in the literature, it is contended that they are more appropriate for the study of SA in collaborative environments.

show abstract

Shared Information Between Pilots and Controllers in Tactical Air Traffic Control

Cited by 17 publications

References 0 publications

Situation Awareness Catches On: What? So What? Now What?

Situation Awareness Catches On: What? So What? Now What?

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Direct Objective Measures of Situation Awareness: A Comparison of SAGAT and SPAM

Genotype and phenotype schemata and their role in distributed situation awareness in collaborative systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About