An Examination of Pilot-Reported Trust and Response to Information Conflicts Experienced on the Flight Deck

Abstract

Abstract. The purpose of this study was to examine how pilots respond to conflicting information on the flight deck. In this study, 108 airline, corporate, and general aviation pilots completed an online questionnaire reporting weather, traffic, and navigation information conflicts experienced on the flight deck, including which information sources they trusted and acted on. Results indicated that weather information conflicts are most commonly experienced, and typically between a certified source in the panel and an uncertified electronic flight bag application. Most participants (a) trusted certified systems due to their accuracy, reliability, recency, and knowledge about the source, and (2) acted on the certified system due to trust, being trained and required to use it, and its indicating a more hazardous situation.

Development of a theoretical model of pilot decision making with conflicting information

“…For example, the location of an aircraft displayed on the ND can differ compared to the location displayed on the EFB. Recent research has found that pilots commonly experience information conflicts between the EFB and the information systems in their panel, including information conflicts related to weather, traffic and navigation information (Carroll et al [2]). If an information conflict is detected by the flight crew, the pilots must determine which source of information to ultimately act on.…”