飞行甲板上飞行员报告的信任与信息冲突反应研究

M. Carroll, Paige L. Sanchez, Donna Wilt
{"title":"飞行甲板上飞行员报告的信任与信息冲突反应研究","authors":"M. Carroll, Paige L. Sanchez, Donna Wilt","doi":"10.1027/2192-0923/a000209","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract. The purpose of this study was to examine how pilots respond to conflicting information on the flight deck. In this study, 108 airline, corporate, and general aviation pilots completed an online questionnaire reporting weather, traffic, and navigation information conflicts experienced on the flight deck, including which information sources they trusted and acted on. Results indicated that weather information conflicts are most commonly experienced, and typically between a certified source in the panel and an uncertified electronic flight bag application. Most participants (a) trusted certified systems due to their accuracy, reliability, recency, and knowledge about the source, and (2) acted on the certified system due to trust, being trained and required to use it, and its indicating a more hazardous situation.","PeriodicalId":121896,"journal":{"name":"Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors","volume":"220 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Examination of Pilot-Reported Trust and Response to Information Conflicts Experienced on the Flight Deck\",\"authors\":\"M. Carroll, Paige L. Sanchez, Donna Wilt\",\"doi\":\"10.1027/2192-0923/a000209\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract. The purpose of this study was to examine how pilots respond to conflicting information on the flight deck. In this study, 108 airline, corporate, and general aviation pilots completed an online questionnaire reporting weather, traffic, and navigation information conflicts experienced on the flight deck, including which information sources they trusted and acted on. Results indicated that weather information conflicts are most commonly experienced, and typically between a certified source in the panel and an uncertified electronic flight bag application. Most participants (a) trusted certified systems due to their accuracy, reliability, recency, and knowledge about the source, and (2) acted on the certified system due to trust, being trained and required to use it, and its indicating a more hazardous situation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":121896,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors\",\"volume\":\"220 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1027/2192-0923/a000209\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1027/2192-0923/a000209","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要本研究的目的是检验飞行员如何应对飞行甲板上相互矛盾的信息。在这项研究中,108名航空公司、公司和通用航空飞行员完成了一份在线问卷,报告了他们在飞行甲板上经历的天气、交通和导航信息冲突,包括他们信任哪些信息源并采取了行动。结果表明,天气信息冲突是最常见的,通常发生在面板中的认证源和未经认证的电子飞行包应用之间。大多数参与者(a)信任认证系统,因为它们的准确性、可靠性、近代性和对来源的了解;(2)由于信任、接受过培训并被要求使用认证系统,以及它表明了更危险的情况,所以对认证系统采取了行动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An Examination of Pilot-Reported Trust and Response to Information Conflicts Experienced on the Flight Deck
Abstract. The purpose of this study was to examine how pilots respond to conflicting information on the flight deck. In this study, 108 airline, corporate, and general aviation pilots completed an online questionnaire reporting weather, traffic, and navigation information conflicts experienced on the flight deck, including which information sources they trusted and acted on. Results indicated that weather information conflicts are most commonly experienced, and typically between a certified source in the panel and an uncertified electronic flight bag application. Most participants (a) trusted certified systems due to their accuracy, reliability, recency, and knowledge about the source, and (2) acted on the certified system due to trust, being trained and required to use it, and its indicating a more hazardous situation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Interactions With Technology in the Cockpit Measuring Presence and Situational Awareness in a Virtual Reality Flight Simulator The Effectiveness of Improving Flight Passengers’ Safety Behaviors by Modifying Auditory Cues Eye-Tracking Crucial Abilities of Pilots and Weapon Systems Officers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1