Human-Computer Interaction Analysis of Flight Management System Messages

Abstract

Researchers have identified low proficiency in pilot response to flight management system error messages and have documented pilot perceptions that the messages contribute to the overall difficulty in learning and using the flight management system. It is well known that sharp reductions in pilot proficiency occur when pilots are asked to perform tasks that are time-critical, occur very infrequently, and are not guided by salient visual cues on the userinterface. This paper describes the results of an analysis of the pilot human-computer interaction required to respond to 67 flight management system error messages from a representative modern flight management system. Thirty-six percent of the messages require prompt pilot response, occur very infrequently, and are not guided by visual cues. These results explain, in part, issues with pilot proficiency, and demonstrate the need for deliberate design of the messages to account for the properties of human-computer interaction. Guidelines for improved training and design of the error messages are discussed.

Automated tool for task analysis of NextGen automation

“…HCIPA is a manual task/usability analysis inspection method that was designed to address issues with usability in the aviation and space industries (Sherry, et al, , 2006. Specifically, these industries were interested in evaluating usability for measures of the performance of training (e.g.…”

“…The HCIPA method has been successfully applied in several projects across domains (Sherry, Polson, 2006). Theses experiences identified the following issues with the HCIPA method: (1) ambiguity in the granularity of tasks, (2) ambiguity in identification of salient visual cues, (3) issues in reliably assessing the salience of visual cues, (4) no method to compute the Trials-to-Mastery and Probability of Failure to Complete a Task.…”

The automation design advisor tool (ADAT): Development and validation of a model‐based tool to support flight deck automation design for nextgen operations

“…These inputs allow us to identify potential design issues and problems using algorithms that compute adherence to or departure from established human factors and cognitive engineering design principles. Algorithms were based on both well‐known human factors design principles (e.g., layout of information should be based on frequency of use, sequence of use, importance of the information), as well as on research addressing pilot interaction with the FMS (Fennell, Sherry, Roberts, & Feary, 2006; Funk et al, 1999; Sherry, Feary, Polson & Fennell, 2003; Sherry, Fennell, Feary, & Polson, 2006a, 2006b).…”

The Automation Design Advisor Tool (ADAT): Supporting Flight Deck Design in NextGen

“…Meaningfulness. This module addresses the problem that many terms and abbreviations chosen by designers may not be readily interpretable by the pilots, particularly if pilots are new to the system, or those terms are infrequently used (Landauer, 1995;Sherry et al, 2006aSherry et al, , 2006b. It is based in part on a Latent Semantic Analysis tool (Blackmon, Mandalia, Polson, and Kitajima, 2007) developed in a similar research effort for NASA, and applied specifically to aviation relevant terms.…”