Trends in Decision Making Research

González, Cleotilde; Meyer, Joachim; Klein, Gary; Yates, JoAnne; Roth, Alvin E.

doi:10.1177/1541931213571037

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…IBLT comprehends the cognitive mechanisms common to DDM situations; it extends previous theories' view of decisions based on judgement and choice to an approach of decision making based on recognition, judgement, choice and feedback (Gonzalez, Vanyukov, and Martin 2005). Other theories such as recognition-primed decision-making ) focus on knowledge, experience and intuition in decision making, considering the context and properties of a decision environment (for an overview of differences between investigations in decision-making, see Gonzalez et al 2013;Gonzalez and Meyer 2016;Gonzalez, Fakhari, & Busemeyer, 2017). Since here we aimed at addressing the learning mechanisms -comprising the four mentioned variableswhen pilots approached the simulation and how they may utilise their approach to other unpredictable conditions, we chose to base our arguments following the IBLT theory.…”

Section: Dynamic Decision-makingmentioning

confidence: 97%

Dynamic decision-making of airline pilots in low-fidelity simulation

Rosa

Dahlström

Knez

et al. 2020

Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Dynamic decision-making in aviation involves complex problem solving in a dynamic environment characterized by goal conflicts and time constrains. Training mostly focuses on testing domain-specific knowledge and skills that may result in context-specific rather than general problem-solving skills. A low-fidelity decision-making simulation may favour the understanding of the decision process rather than the decision outcome alone. We investigated airline pilots' decision-making strategies and task performance through the use of the low-fidelity computer simulation (microworld) COLDSTORE, a non-linear, opaque, time-delayed task. Almost thirty percent of pilots adapted (Adaptors) to the task's demands, reaching the desired objective. About thirty five percent of pilots approached the task using a cautious strategy (Cautious). However, the success rates in reaching the task's objective revealed that performance was compromised for the cautious group. A changing (Changers) and oscillating (Oscillators) approach was also observed. More experienced pilots differed from least experienced pilots in strategy and performance adopted. We suggest that low-fidelity dynamic decision-making simulations offer an environment for practicing and understanding the decision-making process. That may contribute to pilots' ability to coordinate monitoring, recognition, planning, judgement and choice when acting under flight environment time constraints. Relevance to human factors/ergonomics theory Dynamic decision-making training in aviation is limited by systematic checks in domainspecific flight scenarios. This type of training does not offer an environment where pilots can reflect upon the decision-making processes. This limits the development of skills for dealing with abnormal events in flight. The present study categorises pilots' decision-making strategies in a simulation context demanding creative problem-solving skills. We provide an analysis of how pilots approach a problem characterized by goal conflicts, where procedures cannot offer ready-made solutions. Since it is impossible to train pilots to every possible unexpected situation, exposure to such simulations may be used for improving pilots' resilience in future unknown conditions.

show abstract