Selection in Air Traffic Control: Is Nonradar Training a Predictor of Radar Performance?

Objective: The purpose of the current research was to investigate whether performance in nonradar training would predict performance in radar training. Background: There is a discussion in the Federal Aviation Administration about the necessity of keeping nonradar training as part of the required selection criteria for radar controllers. In nonradar training, controllers separate traffic by relying on the estimated time over navigational fixes printed on flight progress strips, rather than monitoring the perceptually available positional information on a radar screen. The two ways of controlling traffic—nonradar and radar—are different along a number of dimensions. Method: Sixteen participants were taught to control simulated air traffic using nonradar and radar procedures. Performance on final radar scenarios was predicted from cognitive variables; performance on earlier, simpler radar scenarios; and performance on nonradar scenarios. Results: Performance during nonradar trials predicted final radar performance (i.e., collisions and landed aircraft count) independent of the predictive power of cognitive variables and above and beyond earlier radar training. Conclusion: Performance in nonradar training enhanced users' ability to predict radar performance, even in addition to the predictive power of simpler, earlier radar performance variables. Good nonradar performers had higher situation awareness in the radar environment. Application: Performance in a nonradar environment may serve as an important selection tool in assessing the performance of student controllers in radar environments. The results indicate the need for future research with field controllers.

[1]  Akiko Nakata,et al.  Situation awareness in air traffic control : enhanced displays for advanced operations , 2000 .

[2]  Michael C. Pyryt Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor analytic studies , 1998 .

[3]  J. Carroll Human Cognitive Abilities-a sur-vey of factor-analytic studies , 1993 .

[4]  Dana Broach Designing Selection Tests for the Future National Airspace System Architecture. , 1997 .

[5]  Francis T. Durso,et al.  Comprehension and Situation Awareness , 2008 .

[6]  Jacob Cohen,et al.  Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences , 1979 .

[7]  R. Dodhia A Review of Applied Multiple Regression/Correlation Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (3rd ed.) , 2005 .

[8]  Danko Nikolić,et al.  SITUATION AWARENESS AS A PREDICTOR OF PERFORMANCE IN EN ROUTE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS , 1998 .

[9]  Richard H. Mogford,et al.  Mental Models and Situation Awareness in Air Traffic Control , 1997 .

[10]  Scott M. Galster,et al.  Air Traffic Controller Performance and Workload Under Mature Free Flight: Conflict Detection and Resolution of Aircraft Self-Separation , 2001 .

[11]  Esa M. Rantanen,et al.  Time-Based Modeling of Human Performance , 2005 .

[12]  S. Green How Many Subjects Does It Take To Do A Regression Analysis. , 1991, Multivariate behavioral research.

[13]  Andrew R. Dattel,et al.  Does Situation Awareness Add to the Validity of Cognitive Tests? , 2006, Hum. Factors.

[14]  Carol A. Manning,et al.  Documentation of validity for the AT-SAT computerized test battery, volume II.: (446082004-001) , 2001 .

[15]  Ruth B. Ekstrom,et al.  Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests , 1976 .

[16]  S. Shapiro,et al.  An Analysis of Variance Test for Normality (Complete Samples) , 1965 .

[17]  J. Dille,et al.  FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION Office of Aviation Medicine , 2001 .

[18]  Cecil R. Reynolds,et al.  Educational Testing Service , 2008 .

[19]  Carol A. Manning,et al.  Validity of the Air Traffic Control Specialist Nonradar Screen as a Predictor of Performance in Radar-based Air Traffic Control Training , 1994 .