Citation

Vu KPL, Silva H, Ziccardi J, Morgan CA, Morales G, Grigoleit T, Lee S, Kiken A, Strybel TZ, Battiste V. Proc. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. Annu. Meet. 2012; 56(1): 16-20.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2012, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Publisher SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/1071181312561024

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

Research on potential NextGen technology has shown that advanced conflict detection and resolution tools can increase air traffic controllers' performance and decrease their workload. However, use of NextGen tools can change the way controllers represent and manage their sector. Kraut et al. (2011) found that when NextGen tools failed in a simulated environment, experienced controllers were able to recover from the error and revert back to manual air traffic management techniques. One question is whether students would be able to recover from failures of technology if they were trained to rely on NextGen tools during acquisition of their air traffic management skills. To answer this question, we performed a simulation in which students were trained over 16 weeks to manage a sector consisting of both NextGen equipped and unequipped aircraft. Reliance on manual skills versus NextGen tools was induced by varying the percentage of equipped aircraft, being mostly NextGen equipped aircraft (75% vs. 25%) or mostly non-equipped aircraft during the first 8 weeks of learning. After the 16 weeks of training, participants were tested under nominal and failure conditions. Results showed that under nominal conditions, the training type was not an important factor. Instead, the percentage of equipped aircraft was the important factor: More equipped aircraft led to better performance and lower workload. However, when comparing the same scenario in which there was a failure of NextGen tools, the group trained to rely more on manual skills early in training performed better than the group trained to rely more on NextGen tools early in training. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Language: en