Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

The evaluation of the decision making processes employed by cadet pilots following a short aeronautical decision-making training program.

By Wen-Chin Li and Don Harris

Abstract

Many aeronautical decision-making (ADM) mnemonic-based methods exist. However, there is no empirical research that suggests that they are actually effective in improving decision-making. Klein (1993), in his study of naturalistic decision making suggested that the decision-making process centers around two processes; situation assessment to generate a plausible course of action and mental simulation to evaluate that course of action for risk management. In this study a short, ADM training course was constructed around two mnemonic methods, SHOR (Stimuli, Hypotheses, Options, and Response) and DESIDE (Detect, Estimate, Set safety objectives, Identify, Do, Evaluate). Forty-one pilots from the Republic of China Tactical Training Wing participated: half received a short ADM training course and half did not. After training, the procedural knowledge underpinning their Situation Assessment and Risk Management ability, two skills essential for successful decision-making, were evaluated using pencil and paper-based knowledge tests based upon several demanding tactical flight situations. These scenarios were designed to encompass the six basic types of decision making described by Orasanu (1993); go/no go decisions; recognition-primed decisions; response selection decisions; resource management decisions; non-diagnostic procedural decisions, and decisions requiring creative problem-solving. The results show gains attributable to the decision making training course in both situation assessment and risk management skills. The results strongly suggest that ADM is trainable and such a training course is effective in improving the bases of in-flight decision-making

Publisher: Federal Aviation Administration Academy
Year: 2006
OAI identifier: oai:dspace.lib.cranfield.ac.uk:1826/1969
Provided by: Cranfield CERES
Journal:

Suggested articles

Citations

  1. (1993). A Model to Support Development of Situation Assessment Aids',
  2. (1993). A Recognition-Primed Decision (RPD) Model of Rapid Decision Making',
  3. (1989). A Simulator-based Approach to Training in Aeronautical Decision Making',
  4. (1993). A survey of Situation Awareness Requirements in Air-to-Air Combat Fighters', doi
  5. (2003). Aeronautical Decision Making: Metaphors, Models, and Methods',
  6. (1984). An Investigation of the Effectiveness of Pilot Judgment Training',
  7. (1989). Beyond CRM to Decisional Heuristics: An Airline Generated Model to Examine Accidents and Incidents Caused by Crew Errors in Deciding',
  8. (1993). Conclusions: Decision Making in Action',
  9. (1997). Current and Future Applications of Naturalistic Decision Making',
  10. (1974). Decision analysis for the manager.
  11. (1993). Decision Making in the Cockpit', doi
  12. (1997). Decision Making Training for Aircrew', in
  13. (1977). Decision making: A Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice, and Commitment, doi
  14. (1997). Deliberate Decision Making by Aircraft Pilots: A simple Reminder to Avoid Decision Making Under Panic', doi
  15. (1998). Evaluating Training Programs, Berrett-Koehler, doi
  16. (1976). Evaluation of Training',
  17. (1995). Expert Pilots' Perceptions of Problem Situations',
  18. (1991). Federal Aviation Administration doi
  19. (1995). FOR-DEC: a perspective model for aeronautical decision making ',
  20. (1981). Force management decision requirements for air force tactical command and control', doi
  21. (2002). General Aviation Aeronautical Decision-making,
  22. (1990). Human Error. Cambridge: doi
  23. (2003). Measuring General Aviation Pilot Judgment Using a Situational Judgment Technique', doi
  24. (2002). Methods used to evaluate the effectiveness of Flightcrew
  25. (1988). Outcome bias in decision evaluation', doi
  26. (1996). Pilot Decision Making - An Alternative to Judgement Training',
  27. (1995). Pilot Judgment and Crew Resource Management, Ashgate,
  28. (2006). SHOR and DESIDE: Evaluating the Effectiveness of ADM Training Using a Flight Simulator. doi
  29. (1997). Situation Assessment for Routine Flight and Decision Making',
  30. (1997). Stress and Naturalistic Decision Making: Strengthening the weak Links',
  31. (1992). The Artful Decision Maker: A Framework Model for Aeronautical Decision Making', doi
  32. (1997). The Current Status of the Naturalistic Decision Making Framework',
  33. (2005). The Identification of Training Needs for Developing Aeronautical Decision-making Training Programs for Military Pilots',
  34. (2005). The Investigation of Suitability of Aeronautical Decision-making Mnemonics in Tactical Environments', doi
  35. (1997). The Role of Situation Awareness in Naturalistic Decision Making', doi
  36. (1993). Twenty Questions: Suggestions for Research in Naturalistic Decision Making',

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.