Engineering topics

Mosier, Kathleen L.

Publications and source records attributed to Mosier, Kathleen L..

6 records

NASA NTRS2017

Autonomous, Context-Sensitive, Task Management Systems and Decision Support Tools I: Human-Autonomy Teaming Fundamentals and State of the Art

Recent advances in artificial intelligence, machine learning, data mining and extraction, and especially in sensor technology have resulted in the availability of a vast amount of digital data and information and the development of advanced automated reasoners. This creates the opportunity for the development of a robust dynamic task manager and decision support tool that is context sensitive and integrates information from a wide array of on-board and off aircraft sourcesa tool that monitors systems and the overall flight situation, anticipates information needs, prioritizes tasks appropriately, keeps pilots well informed, and is nimble and able to adapt to changing circumstances. This is the first of two companion reports exploring issues associated with autonomous, context-sensitive, task management and decision support tools. In the first report, we explore fundamental issues associated with the development of an integrated, dynamic, flight information and automation management system. We discuss human factors issues pertaining to information automation and review the current state of the art of pilot information management and decision support tools. We also explore how effective human-human team behavior and expectations could be extended to teams involving humans and automation or autonomous systems.

context-sensitive↗

NASA NTRS2017

Autonomous, Context-Sensitive, Task Management Systems and Decision Support Tools II: Contextual Constraints and Information Sources

Recent advances in artificial intelligence, machine learning, data mining and sensor technology have resulted in the availability of a vast amount of digital data and information and the development of advanced automated reasoners. This creates the opportunity for the development of a robust dynamic task manager and decision support tool that is context sensitive and integrates information from a wide array of on-board and off aircraft sourcesa tool that monitors systems and the overall flight situation, anticipates information needs, prioritizes tasks appropriately, keeps pilots well informed, and is nimble and able to adapt to changing circumstances. This is the second of two companion reports exploring issues associated with autonomous, context-sensitive, task management and decision support tools. In the first report, we explored fundamental issues associated with the development of such a system. In this report, we extend this work to focus on two critical aspects of these systems: 1) the constraints and conditions that drive the dynamic prioritization and presentation of data and information to the pilots, and 2) specific data and information to be accessed, monitored, integrated, and displayed in such a system.

context-sensitive↗

NASA NTRS1997

Automation Bias: Decision Making and Performance in High-Tech Cockpits

Automated aids and decision support tools are rapidly becoming indispensible tools in high-technology cockpits, and are assuming increasing control of "cognitive" flight tasks, such as calculating fuel-efficient routes, navigating, or detecting and diagnosing system malfunctions and abnormalities. This study was designed to investigate "automation bias," a recently documented factor in the use of automated aids and decision support systems. The term refers to omission and commission errors resulting from the use of automated cues as a heuristic replacement for vigilant information seeking and processing. Glass-cockpit pilots flew flight scenarios involving automation "events," or opportunities for automation-related omission and commission errors. Pilots who perceived themselves as "accountable" for their performance and strategies of interaction with the automation were more likely to double-check automated functioning against other cues, and less likely to commit errors. Pilots were also likely to erroneously "remember" the presence of expected cues when describing their decision-making processes.

Mosier, Kathleen L.↗

NASA NTRS1996

Decision Making In A High-Tech World: Automation Bias and Countermeasures

Automated decision aids and decision support systems have become essential tools in many high-tech environments. In aviation, for example, flight management systems computers not only fly the aircraft, but also calculate fuel efficient paths, detect and diagnose system malfunctions and abnormalities, and recommend or carry out decisions. Air Traffic Controllers will soon be utilizing decision support tools to help them predict and detect potential conflicts and to generate clearances. Other fields as disparate as nuclear power plants and medical diagnostics are similarly becoming more and more automated. Ideally, the combination of human decision maker and automated decision aid should result in a high-performing team, maximizing the advantages of additional cognitive and observational power in the decision-making process. In reality, however, the presence of these aids often short-circuits the way that even very experienced decision makers have traditionally handled tasks and made decisions, and introduces opportunities for new decision heuristics and biases. Results of recent research investigating the use of automated aids have indicated the presence of automation bias, that is, errors made when decision makers rely on automated cues as a heuristic replacement for vigilant information seeking and processing. Automation commission errors, i.e., errors made when decision makers inappropriately follow an automated directive, or automation omission errors, i.e., errors made when humans fail to take action or notice a problem because an automated aid fails to inform them, can result from this tendency. Evidence of the tendency to make automation-related omission and commission errors has been found in pilot self reports, in studies using pilots in flight simulations, and in non-flight decision making contexts with student samples. Considerable research has found that increasing social accountability can successfully ameliorate a broad array of cognitive biases and resultant errors. To what extent these effects generalize to performance situations is not yet empirically established. The two studies to be presented represent concurrent efforts, with student and professional pilot samples, to determine the effects of accountability pressures on automation bias and on the verification of the accurate functioning of automated aids. Students (Experiment 1) and commercial pilots (Experiment 2) performed simulated flight tasks using automated aids. In both studies, participants who perceived themselves as accountable for their strategies of interaction with the automation were significantly more likely to verify its correctness, and committed significantly fewer automation-related errors than those who did not report this perception.

Mosier, Kathleen L.↗

NASA NTRS1993

Flight performance measurement utilizing a figure of merit (FOM)

One of the goals of the NASA Strategic Behavior/Workload Management Program is to develop standardized procedures for constructing figures of merit (FOMs) that describe minimal criteria for flight task performance, as well as summarize overall performance quality. Such a measure could be utilized for evaluating flight crew performance, for assessing the effectiveness of new equipment or technological innovations, or for measuring performance at a particular airport. In this report, we describe the initial phases in the creation of a FOM to be employed in examining crew performance in NASA-Ames Air Ground Compatibility and Strategic Behavior/Workload Management programs.

Mosier, Kathleen L.↗

NASA NTRS1991

Expert decision-making strategies

A recognition-primed decisions (RPD) model is employed as a framework to investigate crew decision-making processes. The quality of information transfer, a critical component of the team RPD model and an indicator of the team's 'collective consciouness', is measured and analyzed with repect to crew performance. As indicated by the RPD model, timing and patterns of information search transfer were expected to reflect extensive and continual situation assessment, and serial evaluation of alternative states of the world or decision response options.

Mosier, Kathleen L.↗