Abstract
The study offers insights into pilot ability to anticipate consequences of actions and how this ability changes with experience. Novice and expert pilots completed trials in which 3 screens depicted a control movement (or control movements), a cockpit flight situation, or a change in flight situation. Changes depicted in the 3rd screen of each trial were consistent, inconsistent with the mental model of the effect of the control movement or movements, or inconsistent with the application of the control movement(s) to the current flight situation. Pilots indicated whether the depicted change was inconsistent or consistent with their expectations, and accuracy of consistency judgments was greater for mental-model than for situation-model inconsistent statements. Experts are more accurate than novices, particularly for trials that involve multiple, meaningfully related control movements. Expert ability to organize information into meaningful units appears to facilitate future flight state projections, and projection failures appear to result from situation- rather than mental-model failures. Actual or potential applications of this research include analysis of flight situation awareness and flight performance errors.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
More From: Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.