The Use of Predictive Displays for Aiding Controller Situation Awareness

Abstract

This study provides an empirical evaluation of the effects of an enhanced predictive display concept for air traffic control. The predictive display informed the controller of the targeted altitude or heading of aircraft in a transitionary state The information provided simulated that which could be produced by a datalink from the aircraft's flight management system in a future air traffic system operation. The pilots in the simulation operated under self-separation rules and did not request clearances for altered flight plans. Use of the predictive display resulted in improvements in some air traffic control performance and situation awareness measures. Based on the results of the study, we recommend making improvements to the predictive display to better integrate it with the controller's radar display.

A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Direct Objective Measures of Situation Awareness: A Comparison of SAGAT and SPAM

“…Other domain specific criticisms of SAGAT are also largely unsupported. Langan-Fox et al (2009) and Jeannot et al (2003), for example, claim that SAGAT for ATC (a) considers all aircraft equal, which is not the case (for example, see Endsley, Mogford, & Stein, 1997; Endsley, Sollenberger, & Stein, 1999), (b) requires expensive simulators (see also Salmon, Stanton, Walker, & Green, 2006), even though many studies use inexpensive microworlds or computer games, and (c) is not suited to multi-sector studies, which is not accurate as many studies involve multiple sectors (e.g., Endsley & Rodgers, 1998). Overall SAGAT had 94% sensitivity in ATC studies.…”

From Here to Autonomy

“…The impact on SA of decreases in attention to the automation (and related information) will be ameliorated to a significant degree by the quality of the system interface, including (a) the degree to which it effectively presents the needed information for decision making; (b) the salience of cues associated with the state of the automation, including modes and system boundary conditions; (c) support for mode transitions, including that needed to engage the automation and to detect and respond to unexpected automation transitions to manual control; and (d) the transparency of the automation for providing understandability of its actions and predictability of future actions (Endsley, Bolte, & Jones, 2003). An effective design of the automation interface can significantly aid in directly improving SA of automation and the system as well as improve the level of trust in the automation and the appropriate calibration of that trust (Endsley, Sollenberger, & Stein, 1999;Furukawa & Parasuraman, 2003;Hoff & Bashir, 2015;Miller, Pelican, & Goldman, 1999;Sklar & Sarter, 1999). The automation interaction paradigm employed is also highly pertinent.…”

Using eye movement activity as a correlate of cognitive workload

“…When employed during high-fidelity human-in-the-loop simulations, this method allows controllers to indicate their instantaneous workload by pressing one of ten keyboard buttons labelled from 1 (low workload-all tasks completed) to 10 (high workload-some tasks left uncompleted). The method has very broad applicability and has been used in a variety of studies including workload assessments during evaluations of situation awareness (Endsley et al, 2000), display concepts (Endsley et al, 1999), Air-Ground Traffic Management (DAG-TM) concepts , and air traffic control communications (Rantanen et al, 2005).…”