The role of metacognition in the relationship between objective and subjective measures of situation awareness

Abstract

The present paper is concerned with the relationship between subjective and objective measures of situation awareness (SA) within the context of a realistic command and control (C2) scenario. A 2-day scenario involved a joint military–civilian C2 exercise relating to the (crisis) management of a large event held in a metropolitan area. The role of participants comprised both the acquisition and maintenance of SA of each crisis event and the coordination of an appropriate course of action. Two measures of SA were collected at the end of each day–Situation Awareness Rating Technique (SART) and Quantitative Assessment of Situation Awareness (QUASA). No correlation was found between QUASA confidence and accuracy scores. However, SART SA, SART S(upply) and SART U(nderstanding) scores showed a negative correlation with QUASA accuracy scores. These results are interpreted in light of Koriat et al.'s (Koriat, A., et al., 2008. Information-based and experience-based metacognitive judgement: evidence from subjective confidence. In: J. Dunlosky and R.A. Bjork, eds. Handbook of metamemory and memory. New York: Taylor & Francis, 117–135) framework of information- and experience-based metacognitive judgements and practical implications for the subjective measurement of SA are discussed. SA is a critical real-world concept, yet its measurement remains ambiguous. The relationship between subjective and objective SA measures was examined within the context of a realistic C2 scenario. Using theories of metacognition, unique insights were gained into how subjective SA plays a strategic role in the acquisition of SA.