Generating Design Requirements for Flight Deck Applications: Applying the Perceptual Cycle Model to Engine Failures on Take-off

References

• Aircraft Safety and Certification Reform Act (2020). Online source: https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/54AF92E2-3000-43B6-AA2A-463C438AEC38. [Visited 23 February 2020]
   Google Scholar
• Aurino, D. E. M. (2000). Human factors and aviation safety: What the industry has, what the industry needs. Ergonomics, 43(7), 952–959. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/001401300409134
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Banks, V. A., Plant, K. L., & Stanton, N. A. (2020, April). Leaps and shunts: Designing pilot decision aids on the flight deck using Rasmussen’s ladder. In R. Charles & D. Golightly. (Eds.), Proceedings from CIEHF Annual conference. Online. Retrieved October 27, 2020, from https://publications.ergonomics.org.uk/uploads/Leaps-and-Shunts-Designing-pilot-decision-aids-on-the-flight-deck-using-Rasmussen’s-ladders.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Banks, V. A., Plant, K. L., & Stanton, N. A. (2018). Driver error or designer error: Using the Perceptual Cycle Model to explore the circumstances surrounding the fatal Tesla crash on 7th May 2016. Safety Science, 108, 278–285. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.12.023
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bartlett, F. C. (1932). Remembering: a study in experimental and social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Benner, L. (1975). DECIDE in hazardous materials emergencies. Fire Journal, 69(4), 21–26.
   Google Scholar
• Casner, S. M., Geven, R. W., & Williams, K. T. (2013). The effectiveness of airline pilot training for abnormal events. Human Factors, 55(3), 477–485. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720812466893
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chartered Institute of Ergonomics and Human Factors (2020) The Human Dimension in Tomorrow’s Aviation System. Online Source: https://www.ergonomics.org.uk/common/Uploaded%20files/Publications/CIEHF-Future-of-Aviation-White-Paper.pdf [Accessed 23 January 2020]
   Google Scholar
• De Florio, F. (2016). Airworthiness: An introduction to aircraft certification and operations. Butterworth-Heinemann.
   Google Scholar
• Federal Aviation Administration (2019). Wildlife strikes to civil aircraft in the United States. National Wildlife Strike Database. Serial Report Number 25.
   Google Scholar
• Gould, J. D., & Lewis, C. (1985). Designing for usability: Key principles and what designers think. Communications of the ACM, 28(3), 300–311. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1145/3166.3170
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris, D. (2007). A human-centred design agenda for the development of single crew operated commercial aircraft. Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology., 79(5), 518–526. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1108/00022660710780650
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris, D., & Stanton, N. A. (2010). Aviation as a system of systems: Preface to the special issue of human factors in aviation. Ergonomics, 53(5), 617–635. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130903521587
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hesse, T., Engström, J., Johansson, E., Varalda, G., Brockmann, M., Rambaldini, A., Fricke, N., Flemisch, F., Köster, F., & Kanstrup, L. (2011, July). Towards user-centred development of integrated information, warning, and intervention strategies for multiple ADAS in the EU project interactive. In International conference on universal access in human-computer interaction (pp. 280–289). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
   Google Scholar
• Kaber, D. B., Riley, J. M., & Tan, K. W. (2002). Improved usability of aviation automation through direct manipulation and graphical user interface design. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 12(2), 153–178. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327108IJAP1202_4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaempf, G. L., & Klein, G. (1994). Aeronautical decision making: The next generation. In N. Eds Johnston, N. McDonald, & R. Fuller (Eds.), Aviation psychology in practise. Taylor & Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Kirwan, B. (1998). Human error identification techniques for risk assessment of high risk systems—Part 1: Review and evaluation of techniques. Applied Ergonomics, 29(3), 157–177. Chicago. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-6870(98)00010-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landman, A., Groen, E. L., Van Paassen, M. M., Bronkhorst, A. W., & Mulder, M. (2017). The influence of surprise on upset recovery performance in airline pilots. The International Journal of Aerospace Psychology, 27(1–2), 2–14. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/10508414.2017.1365610
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Transportation Safety Board (2010). Loss of thrust in both engines after encountering a flock of birds and subsequent ditching on the Hudson River. US Airways Flight 1549 Airbus A320-214, N106US. January 15, 2009. Washington D.C. Online source. Retrieved June 08, 2020, from https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/AAR1003.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Neisser, U. (1976). Cognition and Reality. W. H. Freemand.
   Google Scholar
• Norman, D. A., & Draper, S. W. (1986). User centred system design: New perspectives on human-computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Parnell, K. J., Banks, V. A., Allison, C. K., Plant, K. L., Beecroft, P., & Stanton, N. A. (2020). Designing flight deck applications: Combining insight from end-users and ergonomists. Cognition, Technology & Work, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-020-00629-w
   Google Scholar
• Parnell, K. J., Banks, V. A., Plant, K. L., Griffin, T. G. C., Beecroft, P., & Stanton, N. A. (2019). Predicting design induced error on the flight deck: An aircraft engine oil leak scenario. Human Factors. online first. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819872900
   Google Scholar
• Plant, K. L., & Stanton, N. A. (2012). Why did the pilots shut down the wrong engine? Explaining errors in context using schema theory and the perceptual cycle model. Safety Science, 50(2), 300–315. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2011.09.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plant, K. L., & Stanton, N. A. (2013). What is on your mind? Using the perceptual cycle model and critical decision method to understand the decision-making process in the cockpit. Ergonomics, 56(8), 1232–1250. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2013.809480
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Plant, K. L., & Stanton, N. A. (2016). The development of the schema world action research method (SWARM) for the elicitation of perceptual cycle data. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 17(4), 376–401. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/1463922X.2015.1126867
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rasmussen, J., Pejtersen, A., & Goodstein, L. P. (1994). Cognitive systems engineering. Wiley.
   Google Scholar
• Revell, K. M., Richardson, J., Langdon, P., Bradley, M., Politis, I., Thompson, S., Skrypchuck, L., O’Donoghue, J., Mouzakitis, A., & Stanton, N. A. (2020). Breaking the cycle of frustration: applying neisser’s perceptual cycle model to drivers of semi-autonomous vehicles. Applied Ergonomics, 85, 103037. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2019.103037
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salas, E., Maurino, D., & Curtis, M. (2010). Human factors in aviation (Second ed.). Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Saunders, B., Sim, J., Kingstone, T., Baker, S., Waterfield, J., Bartlam, B., & Jinks, C. (2018). Saturation in qualitative research: Exploring its conceptualization and operationalization. Quality and Quantity, 52(4), 1893–1907. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-015-0290-1
   Google Scholar
• Smith, K., & Hancock, P. A. (1995). Situation awareness is adaptive, externally directed consciousness. Human Factors, 37(1), 137–148. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1518/001872095779049444
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Song, Y., Horton, B., & Bayandor, J. (2017). Investigation of UAS ingestion into high-bypass engines, Part 1: Bird vs. drone. In 58th AIAA/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics, and Materials Conference (pp. 0186), Texas, US.
   Google Scholar
• Stanton, N. A., Salmon, P. M., Rafferty, L. A., Walker, G. H., Baber, C., & Jenkins, D. P. (2013). Human factors methods:a practical guide for engineering and design. USA: CRC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stanton, N. A., Salmon, P. M., Walker, G. H., & Jenkins, D. P. (2010). Is situation awareness all in the mind?. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science,11(1–2), 29–40.
   Google Scholar
• Stanton, N. A., Stewart, R., Harris, D., Houghton, R. J., Baber, C., McMaster, R., Salmon, P., Hoyle, G., Walker, G., Young, M., Linsell, M., Dymott, R., & Green, D. (2006). Distributed situation awareness in dynamic systems: Theoretical development and application of an ergonomics methodology. Ergonomics, 49(12), 1288–1311. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/00140130600612762
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanton, N. A., & Young, M. S. (2003). Giving ergonomics away? The application of ergonomics methods by novices. Applied Ergonomics, 34(5), 479–490. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0003-6870(03)00067-X
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanton, N. A., Young, M. S., & Harvey, C. (2014). A guide to methodology in ergonomics: designing for human use (second edition). CRC Press: London.
   Google Scholar
• Walters, A. (2002). Crew resource management is no accident. Aries.
   Google Scholar
• Wendel, W. B. (2019). Technological solutions to human error and how they can kill you: Understanding the boeing 737 max products liability litigation. Journal of Air Law. & Commerce, 84, 379. https://scholar.smu.edu/jalc/vol84/iss3/3
   Google Scholar
• Wohl, J. G. (1981). Force management decision requirements for air force tactical command and control. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Mans, and Cybernetics, 11, 618–639. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMC.1981.4308760
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar