Defining the Relationship Between Human Error Classes and Technology Intervention Strategies

One of the main factors in all aviation accidents is human error. The NASA Aviation Safety Program (AvSP), therefore, has identified several human-factors safety technologies to address this issue. Some technologies directly address human error either by attempting to reduce the occurrence of errors or by mitigating the negative consequences of errors. However, new technologies and system changes may also introduce new error opportunities or even induce different types of errors. Consequently, a thorough understanding of the relationship between error classes and technology "fixes" is crucial for the evaluation of intervention strategies outlined in the AvSP, so that resources can be effectively directed to maximize the benefit to flight safety. The purpose of the present project, therefore, was to examine the repositories of human factors data to identify the possible relationship between different error class and technology intervention strategies. The first phase of the project, which is summarized here, involved the development of prototype data structures or matrices that map errors onto "fixes" (and vice versa), with the hope of facilitating the development of standards for evaluating safety products. Possible follow-on phases of this project are also discussed. These additional efforts include a thorough and detailed review of the literature to fill in the data matrix and the construction of a complete database and standards checklists.

[1]  Scott A. Shappell,et al.  APPLYING REASON: THE HUMAN FACTORS ANALYSIS AND CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM (HFACS) , 2001 .

[2]  D A Wiegmann,et al.  Human error analysis of commercial aviation accidents: application of the Human Factors Analysis and Classification system (HFACS). , 2001, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[3]  K. Preston White,et al.  Systems engineering models of human-machine interaction , 1981, Proceedings of the IEEE.

[4]  C. Wickens.  Engineering psychology and human performance, 2nd ed. , 1992 .

[5]  John W. Senders,et al.  Human Error: Cause, Prediction, and Reduction , 1991 .

[6]  Scott A. Shappell,et al.  Human Factors Analysis of Postaccident Data: Applying Theoretical Taxonomies of Human Error , 1997 .

[7]  Laurie A. Broedling,et al.  Taxonomies of Human Performance: The Description of Human Tasks , 1984 .

[8]  Silja Renooij,et al.  Probability elicitation for belief networks: issues to consider , 2001, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[9]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation , 2000, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[10]  Bruce A Smith,et al.  SKY'S NO LIMIT FOR E-MAIL AS AIRLINES ADD INFLIGHT UPGRADES. , 2001 .

[11]  E. Smith,et al.  Choice reaction time: an analysis of the major theoretical positions. , 1968, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  INVESTIGATION OF HUMAN FACTORS IN ACCIDENTS AND INCIDENTS , 2002 .

[13]  A E Diehl.  HUMAN PERFORMANCE ASPECTS OF AIRCRAFT ACCIDENTS , 1989 .

[14]  J. F. Gamlin.  Human Performance Engineering: a Guide for Systems Designers , 1983 .

[15]  Saul Sternberg,et al.  The discovery of processing stages: Extensions of Donders' method , 1969 .

[16]  James A. Carter.  A Taxonomy of User-Oriented Functions , 1986, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[17]  George R. Wheaton,et al.  Development of a Taxonomy of Human Performance: The Task Characteristics Approach to Performance Prediction , 1971 .

[18]  Wiktor Jassem,et al.  Speech analysis and synthesis , 1976 .

[19]  Joseph J. Hurrell,et al.  The value of work, the risk of distress, and the power of prevention. , 1992 .

[20]  Colin G. Drury,et al.  A Taxonomy of Independent Variables Affecting Human Performance , 1989, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[21]  D. Broadbent.  Perception and communication , 1958 .

[22]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  An introduction to human factors engineering , 1997 .

[23]  J. Shaoul.  Human Error , 1973, Nature.

[24]  G. R. Wheaton,et al.  DEVELOPMENT OF A TAXONOMY OF HUMAN PERFORMANCE: A REVIEW OF CLASSIFICATORY SYSTEMS RELATING TO TASKS AND PERFORMANCE , 1968 .

[25]  Edwin A. Fleishman,et al.  DEVELOPMENT OF A TAXONOMY OF HUMAN PERFORMANCE: A REVIEW OF DESCRIPTIVE SCHEMES FOR HUMAN TASK BEHAVIOR. , 1969 .

[26]  G. C. Moen,et al.  Cockpit Display of Traffic Information /CDTI/ , 1980 .

[27]  J. G. Hollands,et al.  Engineering Psychology and Human Performance , 1984 .

[28]  Robert P. Meyer,et al.  Development and Application of a Task Taxonomy for Tactical Flying , 1979 .

[29]  Warren H. Teichner,et al.  Development of a Taxonomy of Human Performance: An Information-Theoretic Approach , 1971 .

[30]  S. Arom,et al.  African polyphony and polyrhythm: Description and analysis , 1991 .

[31]  S. Bennett.  Beyond Aviation Human Factors , 2003 .

[32]  Clark A. Shingledecker,et al.  Standardized Tests for the Evaluation and Classification of Workload Metrics , 1982 .

[33]  Robert M. Gagné,et al.  Essentials of Learning for Instruction , 1988 .

[34]  W. Haddon,et al.  Options for the prevention of motor vehicle crash injury. , 1980, Israel journal of medical sciences.

[35]  Kim M Cardosi,et al.  Human Factors Checklist for the Design and Evaluation of Air Traffic Control Systems , 1995 .

[36]  Scott A. Shappell,et al.  Human Error and Accident Causation Theories, Frameworks and Analytical Techniques: An Annotated Bibliography , 2000 .

[37]  I Hindmarch.  Psychomotor function and psychoactive drugs. , 1980, British journal of clinical pharmacology.