An empirical evaluation of graphical interfaces to support flight planning

Abstract

Whether optimization techniques or expert systems technologies are used, the underlying inference processes and the model or knowledge base for a computerized problem-solving system are likely to be incomplete for any given complex, real-world task. To deal with the resultant brittleness, it has been suggested that 'cooperative' rather than 'automated' problem-solving systems be designed. Such cooperative systems are proposed to explicitly enhance the collaboration of people and the computer system when working in partnership to solve problems. This study evaluates the impact of alternative design concepts on the performance of airline pilots interacting with such a cooperative system designed to support enroute flight planning. Thirty pilots were studied using three different versions of the system. The results clearly demonstrate that different system design concepts can strongly influence the cognitive processes of users. Indeed, one of the designs studied caused four times as many pilots to accept a poor flight amendment. Based on think-aloud protocols, cognitive models are proposed to account for how features of the computer system interacted with specific types of scenarios to influence exploration and decision-making by the pilots. The results are then used to develop recommendations for guiding the design of cooperative systems