FASA: Development and Validation of a Novel Measure to Assess the Effectiveness of Commercial Airline Pilot Situation Awareness Training

The present study took a novel approach to the assessment of a commercial airline pilot Situation Awareness (SA) training programme. The Factors Affecting Situation Awareness (FASA) questionnaire was developed to provide a more diagnostic measure of aircrews' acquisition and maintenance of SA. Thirty-two aircrew participants took part in this study; half received standard Line-Oriented Flight Training (LOFT) and half received bespoke SA training. The results of the study provide strong evidence for the reliability of FASA to detect improvements to aircrew SA afforded by the training programme. The implications of these findings to SA measurement are discussed.

[1]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Situation Awareness Problems in General Aviation , 2000 .

[2]  R. Parasuraman.  Memory load and event rate control sensitivity decrements in sustained attention. , 1979, Science.

[3]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and Automatic Human Information Processing: 1. Detection, Search, and Attention. , 1977 .

[4]  Charmine E. J. Härtel,et al.  Defining aircrew coordination: Searching mishaps for meaning , 1989 .

[5]  L M Giambra,et al.  A Two-Term Exponential Functional Description of the Time Course of Sustained Attention , 1987, Human factors.

[6]  J. Easterbrook.  The effect of emotion on cue utilization and the organization of behavior. , 1959, Psychological review.

[7]  Donald E. Broadbent,et al.  Decision and stress , 1971 .

[8]  M. Eysenck.  Anxiety: The Cognitive Perspective , 1992 .

[9]  R R Mackie,et al.  Vigilance Research—Are We Ready for Countermeasures? , 1987, Human factors.

[10]  C. MacLeod,et al.  Cognitive functioning and anxiety , 1987, Psychological research.

[11]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. , 1977 .

[12]  C D Wickens,et al.  Compatibility and Resource Competition between Modalities of Input, Central Processing, and Output , 1983, Human factors.

[13]  M. Eysenck,et al.  Attention and Arousal , 1982 .

[14]  P. Wason.  On the Failure to Eliminate Hypotheses in a Conceptual Task , 1960 .

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

[16]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Pilot Situation Awareness Training in General Aviation , 2000 .

[17]  M. Eysenck.  Attention And Arousal, Cognition And Performance , 1982 .

[18]  Nic James,et al.  Training to break the barriers of habit in reasoning about unusual faults , 1999 .

[19]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The Structure of Attentional Resources , 1980 .

[20]  Eduardo Salas,et al.  Does CRM Training Improve Teamwork Skills in the Cockpit?: Two Evaluation Studies , 1999, Hum. Factors.

[21]  D. Broadbent,et al.  What makes interruptions disruptive? A study of length, similarity, and complexity , 1989 .

[22]  A Latorella Kara,et al.  Investigating Interruptions: Implications for Flightdeck Performance , 1999 .

[23]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Measurement of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[24]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Toward a Theory of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[25]  Clint A. Bowers,et al.  Team Training in the Skies: Does Crew Resource Management (CRM) Training Work? , 2001, Hum. Factors.

[26]  M R Endsley,et al.  Sources of situation awareness errors in aviation. , 1996, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.