A Methodology for Assessing Safety Programs Targeting Human Error in Aviation

There is a need to develop an effective methodology for generating and evaluating intervention strategies that map current and proposed safety programs onto well-established types of human error. Toward these ends, we conducted 2 studies using recommendations from National Transportation Safety Board accident investigations and two joint Federal Aviation Administration and industry working groups. The goal of these studies was to identify the types of interventions commonly recommended by these agencies, as well as to develop a framework for evaluating the potential impact of specific safety initiatives that target human error in aviation. The results suggest there are at least 5 approaches to reducing human errors associated with aviation accidents. However, not all are equally utilized by the agencies whose safety recommendations we evaluated in this study. Therefore, we propose a framework called the Human Factors Intervention Matrix as a potential tool for evaluating current aviation safety programs, as well as generating more comprehensive interventions in the future.

[1]  Albert Boquet,et al.  Human Error and Commercial Aviation Accidents: A Comprehensive, Fine-Grained Analysis Using HFACS , 2006 .

[2]  Albert Boquet,et al.  Beneath the Tip of the Iceberg: A Human Factors Analysis of General Aviation Accidents in Alaska Versus the Rest of the United States , 2006 .

[3]  Albert Boquet,et al.  Human Error and Commercial Aviation Accidents: An Analysis Using the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System , 2007, Hum. Factors.

[4]  Albert Boquet,et al.  Human Error and General Aviation Accidents: A Comprehensive, Fine-Grained Analysis Using HFACS , 2005 .

[5]  Nadine B. Sarter,et al.  Pilot Interaction With Cockpit Automation: Operational Experiences With the Flight Management System , 1992 .

[6]  Scott A. Shappell,et al.  HFACS Analysis of Military and Civilian Aviation Accidents: A North American Comparison , 2004 .

[7]  Esa M. Rantanen,et al.  Defining the Relationship Between Human Error Classes and Technology Intervention Strategies , 2002 .

[8]  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.

[9]  Scott A. Shappell,et al.  A HUMAN ERROR APPROACH TO AVIATION ACCIDENT ANALYSIS , 2003 .

[10]  J. Reason Human error: models and management , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  C. W. Johnson On the Over-Emphasis of Human ‘Error’ As A Cause of Aviation Accidents: ‘Systemic Failures’ and ‘Human Error’ in US NTSB and Canadian TSB Aviation Reports 1996-2003 , 2004 .

[12]  John A. Stoop Accident investigations: trends, paradoxes and opportunities , 2002 .

[13]  Nadine B. Sarter,et al.  Pilot Interaction With Cockpit Automation II: An Experimental Study of Pilots’ Model and Awareness of the Flight Management System , 1994 .

[14]  J. Siegel,et al.  The Investigative Process , 2007 .

[15]  David C. Webb,et al.  Beneath the Tip of the Iceberg: Using Representations to Support Student Understanding. , 2008 .

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