Engineering topics

Orasanu, Judith

Publications and source records attributed to Orasanu, Judith.

25 records · Page 2

NASA NTRS1994

Situational Variables in Expert Pilot Decision Making

In traditional laboratory studies of decision making, the experimenter structures the problem, defines the goal and specifies available information. In contrast, when people make decisions in non-laboratory environments characterized as complex, dynamic and consequential, they must first identify the problem and determine what information and responses are relevant. The present research was designed to investigate which situational aspects are important to experienced pilots making aviation decisions. Twenty-eight professional pilots were asked to sort descriptions of 22 aircraft incidents into piles involving similar types of major decisions. Preliminary analyses suggest four underlying variables: time pressure, risk level, available resources, and certainty of goal attainment.

Fischer, Ute↗

NASA NTRS1993

Distributed problem solving by pilots and dispatchers

The study addressed the following question: Are flight planning problems solved differently by PILOTS and DISPATCHERS when they work alone versus when they work together? Aspect of their performance that were of interest include the following: Problem perception and definition; Problem solving strategies and information use; Options considered; Solution and rational; and errors.

Orasanu, Judith↗

NASA NTRS1993

Efficient decision strategies on the flight deck

Both crew productivity and flight safety depend critically on efficient crew problem solving and decision making. But what constitutes efficient problem solving and decision making behavior? Previous work has focused on crew performance in the context of a specific problem type. The present study differs from these analyses in two respects. First, we describe how aircraft crews cope with different types of problems. And second, we attempt to discern characteristics of optimal task management behavior. For this reason, we contrasted the behavior of more effective and less effective crews. Underlying this approach is the assumption that crews whom commit few operational errors also demonstrate most efficient problem solving and decision making behavior.

Fischer, Ute↗

NASA NTRS1993

Criteria for assessing problem solving and decision making in complex environments

Training crews to cope with unanticipated problems in high-risk, high-stress environments requires models of effective problem solving and decision making. Existing decision theories use the criteria of logical consistency and mathematical optimality to evaluate decision quality. While these approaches are useful under some circumstances, the assumptions underlying these models frequently are not met in dynamic time-pressured operational environments. Also, applying formal decision models is both labor and time intensive, a luxury often lacking in operational environments. Alternate approaches and criteria are needed. Given that operational problem solving and decision making are embedded in ongoing tasks, evaluation criteria must address the relation between those activities and satisfaction of broader task goals. Effectiveness and efficiency become relevant for judging reasoning performance in operational environments. New questions must be addressed: What is the relation between the quality of decisions and overall performance by crews engaged in critical high risk tasks? Are different strategies most effective for different types of decisions? How can various decision types be characterized? A preliminary model of decision types found in air transport environments will be described along with a preliminary performance model based on an analysis of 30 flight crews. The performance analysis examined behaviors that distinguish more and less effective crews (based on performance errors). Implications for training and system design will be discussed.

Orasanu, Judith↗

NASA NTRS1993

Design of a cooperative problem-solving system for enroute flight planning: An empirical study of its use by airline dispatchers

In a previous report, an empirical study of 30 pilots using the Flight Planning Testbed was reported. An identical experiment using the Flight Planning Testbed (FPT), except that 27 airline dispatchers were studied, is described. Five general questions were addressed in this study: (1) under what circumstances do the introduction of computer-generated suggestions (flight plans) influence the planning behavior of dispatchers (either in a beneficial or adverse manner); (2) what is the nature of such influences (i.e., how are the person's cognitive processes changed); (3) how beneficial are the general design concepts underlying FPT (use of a graphical interface, embedding graphics in a spreadsheet, etc.); (4) how effective are the specific implementation decisions made in realizing these general design concepts; and (5) how effectively do dispatchers evaluate situations requiring replanning, and how effectively do they identify appropriate solutions to these situations.

Smith, Philip J.↗

NASA NTRS1991

Information transfer and shared mental models for decision making

A study to determine how communication influences flight crew performance is presented. This analysis focuses on the content of communication, principally asking what an utterance does from a cognitive, problem solving viewpoint. Two questions are addressed in this study: how is language utilized to manage problems in the cockpit, and are there differences between two- and three-member crews in their communication and problem solving strategies?

Orasanu, Judith↗

NASA NTRS1991

Individual differences in airline captains' personalities, communication strategies, and crew performance

Aircrew effectiveness in coping with emergencies has been linked to captain's personality profile. The present study analyzed cockpit communication during simulated flight to examine the relation between captains' discourse strategies, personality profiles, and crew performance. Positive Instrumental/Expressive captains and Instrumental-Negative captains used very similar communication strategies and their crews made few errors. Their talk was distinguished by high levels of planning and strategizing, gathering information, predicting/alerting, and explaining, especially during the emergency flight phase. Negative-Expressive captains talked less overall, and engaged in little problem solving talk, even during emergencies. Their crews made many errors. Findings support the theory that high crew performance results when captains use language to build shared mental models for problem situations.

Orasanu, Judith↗