Effectiveness of computer-based attention sharing training on SA

Bolstad et al assessed the effectiveness of computer-based training of attention sharing skills on situation awareness and flight skills. They did an experiment with general aviation (GA) pilots (around 2003?) and published it in an article in 20101.

They used GA pilots already holding a private pilot's licence and with experience averaging 200 flight hours((bibcite Footnote 1)). These pilots received computer training on performing four tasks concurrently:

  • Visual search - "sky" scanning
  • Gauge monitoring
  • ATC comprehension
  • Psychomotor tracking

The performance of the pilots on above task, as well as their performance on a flight simulator, were compared before and after receiving the training. A different group of pilots was used as control group2. Some 21 (independent) variables were measured, with training acting as the research (dependent) variable of interest. The main research hypothesis was that training would improve the specific skills being trained as well as overall situation awareness (measured with SAGAT3) and flight skills (measured in the flight simulator).

The research results are summarized in table 1. Training seems to improve (significantly) some of the particular skills being trained. It also appears to improve (significantly) some aspects of situation awareness.

However, these results need to be interpreted with care. On the one hand, only 3 out of 13 situation awareness variables were significant, which is not a great deal of improvement if situation awareness were, indeed, improving. On the other hand, the researchers opted for a one-tailed level of significance with a probability of 0.05, and carried some 21 t-tests. We could expect almost one of those tests to be significant by chance alone if a probability of 0.05 was used. Yet, the evidence suggests that the researchers were, indeed, using a probability of 0.10 (or two-tailed tests with a probability of 0.05 for each tail), in which case we would expect almost two of those tests to be significant by chance alone. (The table shows results which are coherent with one-tailed tests and a significance level of 0.05).

Given that situation awareness has not been trained directly, the improvement in such awareness may be simply incorrect, that is, a chance result. In this case, is safer to assume that the training of particular skills seems to partially improve those skills, but does not seem to have a clear effect neither on situation awareness nor on flight skills performance (in a simulator).

Table 1
Effect of training on particular skills
skill significant improvement?
Visual search reaction time yes
Gauge monitoring reaction time yes
ATC comprehension no
Psychomotor skills difficulty no
Reduction of psychomotor errors yes
Effect of training on flight skills and SA
skill significant improvement?
Flight skills performance (overall) no4
SAGAT: awareness of current heading no
SAGAT: awareness of current altitude no5
SAGAT: awareness of current vs planned altitude no
SAGAT: awareness of current airspeed no
SAGAT: awareness of current attitude no
SAGAT: awareness of current winds yes
SAGAT: awareness of current clearance no
SAGAT: awareness of current fuel no
SAGAT: awareness of special airspace no
SAGAT: awareness of current obstacles no
SAGAT: awareness of current altimeter setting no
SAGAT: awareness of current ATC organization no
SAGAT: awareness of current airspace (added item) no
References
1. BOLSTAD Cheryl A, Mica R ENDSLEY, Anthony M COSTELLO & Cass HOWELL (2008). Evaluation of computer-based situation awareness training for general aviation pilots. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 2010, number 20, volume 3, pages 269-294. ISSN 1050-8414.
+++ Footnotes +++
2. Sample size of the experimental group = 11 pilots; sample size of the control group = 13 pilots.
3. SAGAT here stands for the GA aircraft version of the Situation Awareness Global Assessement Technique, used to assess the degree of situational awareness that a pilot has over several flight parameters at different times during a flight. The researchers used only 12 items of the original 15-item questionnaire, and included an extra item on airspace awareness.
4. The authors report that the control group performed "significanlty" better than the experimental group for some skills measured in the simulator. However, the interpretation is incoherent with the one-tailed statistical significance approach opted for. That is, in principle, they can only support significant results whereby the experimental group achieves better results than the control group, not viceversa. In order to support the researchers' conclusions, we have to assume two-tailed tests with a significance level of 0.10, which do not seem to be the intended significance level.
5. The authors report "significantly" better results for the control group in this item. However, the interpretation is incoherent with the one-tailed statistical significance approach opted for. That is, in principle, the test can only support significant results whereby the experimental group achieves better results than the control group, not viceversa. In order to support the researchers' conclusions, we have to assume two-tailed tests with a significance level of 0.10, which do not seem to be the intended significance level.

Want to know more?

BOLSTAD Cheryl A, Mica R ENDSLEY, Anthony M COSTELLO & Cass HOWELL (2010). Evaluation of computer-based situation awareness training for general aviation pilots. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 2010, number 20, volume 3, pages 269-294. ISSN 1050-8414.
This is the original article, with above research described as experiment 2. (People with online access to the publisher can find the original article here.)
AviationKnowledge - Situational awareness
You can find information on situation awareness in this page.
AviationKnowledge - Effectiveness of computer-based training on SA
There are two other experiments releated to the one described here: the effectiveness of computer-based basic skills training on SA and the effectiveness of computer-based preflight planning training on SA

Editor

Jose D PEREZGONZALEZ (2011). School of Aviation, Massey University, New Zealand (JDPerezgonzalezJDPerezgonzalez).


Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License