A New Approach to Aeronautical Decision Making: The Expertise Method

21st International Symposium on Aviation Psychology

“…Accidents which involve such experienced pilots suggest total flight hours may be an inadequate measure of experience. Indeed, Kochan, Jensen and Chubb (1997) have noted that more than total flying hours is required to make an expert pilot and suggested other dimensions such as the relevance, meaningfulness, recency, number and variety of the experience are also important. However, so far, no studies have been carried out to investigate the impact, if any, these dimensions may have in pilot decision making.…”

“…There is some research as well as anecdotal evidence to suggest experience is a multidimensional attribute, with each dimension made up of several elements or variables. Apart from the number of total flight hours a pilot may have accumulated, several other elements such as the number of hours flown in the aircraft make/model, total hours flown in the last 90 days, cross-country hours flown, instrument rating, certificate type and airplane rating have also been mentioned as important variables that determine the accuracy of decision making during encounters with adverse weather (Kochan, Jensen and Chubb, 1997;Wiggins and O'Hare, 1995;NTSB, 2005;Wiegmann, Goh & O'Hare, 2002). However, not much work has been done to empirically investigate and ascertain the efficacy of the variables in helping pilots avoid accidents during encounters with adverse weather, or the relationship between the dimensions and variables, Therefore, we do not know whether any of the elements of experience alone or in combinations, reflect or are predictive of the likelihood of an accident.…”

Enhancing the Safety Training of GA Pilots to Reduce the Risk of Bird Strikes: An Experimental Pilot Study

“…However, the investigation of high-profile accidents clearly indicates that flight experience alone will not suffice to enhance pilots' ADM processes. Moreover, previous studies suggest that effective ADM can be taught (Keller, 2015;Kochan, Jensen, Chubb, & Hunter, 1997;O'Hare, Mullen, & Arnold, 2010;Winter, Fanjoy, Lu, Carney, & Greenan, 2014). The benefits of effective ADM for aviation safety has prompted the FAA to require ADM and safety risk management training be taught within Part 61 (Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, Title 14, Chapter I, Subchapter D, Part 61, 2018), and Part 141 (Electronic Code of Federal Regulations, Title 14, Chapter I, Subchapter H, Part 141, 2018) flight school ground training curricula.…”

Elements Related to Teaching Pilots Aeronautical Decision Making

“…Naturalistic models are non-linear and are modeled after how experts make decisions. The literature review covered nine various decision making models: conventional (FAA, 1991), FAA (FAA, 2008), Jensen's judgment (Jensen, 1995), drawing a box (Wright, n.d.), setting decision points (Belanger, 2001), AOPA (Peterson, 2006), SA and CoA (Orasanu & Fischer, 1997), ADM expertise (Kochan, Jensen, Chubb, & Hunter, 1997), and cognitive SOARing (Adams, 1994). The first six models fit into classical decision making, while the last three models use naturalistic theories.…”

“…To help pilots become experts and exercise good judgment, they must be able to think like an expert, which is the foundation of the ADM expertise model. Instead of focusing on changing the attitudes of pilots, Kochan, Jensen, Chubb, and Hunter (1997) concentrated on discovering how expert pilots think. They believed that previous approaches to ADM training had reached their maximum effectiveness due to the fact that errors in judgment are still the major cause of aviation accidents.…”