Situation Awareness and the Cognitive Management of Complex Systems

Abstract

The issue of how to support situation awareness among operators of complex systems or vehicles is a growing concern in a number of industries, especially when automation takes the operators partly "out of the loop." Cognitive theory suggests that comprehension of the flow of events is an active process, constrained by the dynamics and modularity of attention and memory. Focusing on issues of commercial aviation, we review the meaning of the term situation awareness both definition ally and by way of examples. We then discuss the cognitive factors involved in achieving and maintaining situation awareness, drawing on recent cognitive theory to clarify their interactions. Finally, having emphasized the need for a more analytic and precise understanding of situation awareness, we discuss strengths and weaknesses of various empirical approaches that might be used toward that end.

A situation awareness analysis scheme to identify deficiencies of complex man-machine interactions

“…Endsley (1995) Current SA theories show that SA assessment is influenced by individual, task and system factors. Operators' abilities, attention, working memory capacity, experience, level of training, information processing mechanisms, goals specific to their needs, and expectations are considered as influential individual factors (Adams et al, 1995;Durso and Sethumadhavan, 2008;Endsley, 1995;Patrick and Morgan, 2010). Task complexity, stress, workload and automation are considered as task factors which influence SA assessment (Endsley, 1995;Kaber et al, 2006;Wickens, 2002).…”

Drivers’ Reliance on Lane-Keeping Assistance Systems as a Function of the Level of Assistance

“…The view of SA as a product or process has important implications for its operational definition and its measurement. Yet another view is taken by researchers who emphasise the interrelationship between product and process in postulating that the current mental representation affects the process of acquiring and interpreting new information in an on-going cycle (e.g., Adams, Tenney, & Pew, 1995, by referring to Neisser's perceptual cycle). This view of SA as interrelated product and process is hold in this work.…”

“…This situation model is dynamic in the sense that it has to be continuously updated through the alternation of top-down and bottom-up attentional processes (Adams et al, 1995;Baumann & Krems, 2007;Durso et al, 2007;Endsley, 1995bEndsley, , 2000b. The construction of the situational model is based on the perception of new elements in the environment which are then integrated into a coherent mental representation by means of pattern recognition (Durso & Gronlund, 1999;Durso et al, 2007).…”

“…The successful alternation of top-down and bottom-up control of attention is seen as a prerequisite for maintaining a high level of situation awareness (Adams et al, 1995;Durso et al, 2007;Endsley, 1995bEndsley, , 2000b. The currency and comprehensiveness of the situation model is necessary for guiding attention to the relevant cues in the environment (top-down control of attention).…”

A Review of Situation Awareness Literature Relevant to Pilot Surveillance Functions

“…Other approaches have been suggested that emphasize the dynamic nature of this process. For example, one approach that emphasizes the dynamic nature of SA is the use of the perception/action cycle (Adams, Tenney, & Pew, 1995). Figure 2 shows that the perception/action cycle consists of three elements: (a) the object (i.e., available information in the external environment); (b) the schema (i.e., internal knowledge that is theoretically structured in an organized manner, developed through training/experience, and is stored in long-term memory when not in use); and (c) exploration (i.e., a search of the environment by the observer).…”