Automation Surprise: Results of a Field Survey of Dutch Pilots

Automation surprise (AS) has often been associated with aviation safety incidents. Although numerous laboratory studies have been conducted, few data are available from routine flight operations. A survey among a representative sample of 200 Dutch airline pilots was used to determine the prevalence of AS and the severity of its consequences, and to test some of the factors leading to AS. Results show that AS is a relatively widespread phenomenon that occurs three times per year per pilot on average but rarely has serious consequences. In less than 10% of the AS cases that were reviewed, an undesired aircraft state was induced. Reportable occurrences are estimated to occur only once every 1–3 years per pilot. Factors leading to a higher prevalence of AS include less flying experience, increasing complexity of the flight control mode, and flight duty periods of over 8 hr. It is concluded that AS is a manifestation of system and interface complexity rather than cognitive errors.

[1]  D. Kahneman Thinking, Fast and Slow , 2011 .

[2]  Beth M Hartzler,et al.  Fatigue on the flight deck: the consequences of sleep loss and the benefits of napping. , 2014, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[3]  D. L. Simms,et al.  Normal Accidents: Living with High-Risk Technologies , 1986 .

[4]  G. Fricchione Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Reason and the Human Brain , 1995 .

[5]  Earl L. Wiener,et al.  Human factors of advanced technology (glass cockpit) transport aircraft , 1989 .

[6]  Erik Hollnagel,et al.  Joint Cognitive Systems: Patterns in Cognitive Systems Engineering , 2006 .

[7]  P. Johnson-Laird How We Reason , 2006 .

[8]  R. Boer,et al.  Seneca’s Error : An Affective Model of Cognitive Resistance , 2012 .

[9]  R. Key Dismukes Understanding and Analyzing Human Error in Real-World Operations , 2010 .

[10]  D. Woods,et al.  Automation Surprises , 2001 .

[11]  Joris Field,et al.  “Staying ahead of the aircraft ” and Managing Surprise in Modern Airliners , 2013 .

[12]  Karel Hurts,et al.  The Duration of Automation Bias in a Realistic Setting , 2014 .

[13]  Ute Fischer,et al.  Exploring Relationships of Human-Automation Interaction Consequences on Pilots , 2015, Hum. Factors.

[14]  Huiyang Li,et al.  Human Performance Consequences of Stages and Levels of Automation , 2014, Hum. Factors.

[15]  David Moriarty Practical Human Factors for Pilots , 2014 .

[16]  Arjan Lemmers,et al.  Investigating Flight Crew Recovery Capabilities Regarding System Failures in Highly Automated Fourth Generation Aircraft , 2015 .

[17]  D. Woods,et al.  Behind Human Error , 2010 .

[18]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Complacency and Bias in Human Use of Automation: An Attentional Integration , 2010, Hum. Factors.