Timestamp Representative of Weather Radar Images in the Cockpit

References

• Baldauf, D., Burgard, E., & Wittmann, M. (2009). Time perception as a workload measure in simulated car driving. Applied Ergonomics, 40(5), 929–935.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boucek, G., Veitengruber, J., & Smith, W. (1977). Aircraft alerting systems criteria study II: Human factors guidelines for aircraft alerting systems (FAA Report FAA–RD–76–222, II). Washington, DC: Federal Aviation Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Chamberlain, J. P., & Latorella, K. A. (2001). Convective weather detection by general aviation pilots with conventional and data-linked graphical weather information sources. In Proceedings of the 20th Digital Avionics Systems Conference. Daytona Beach, FL.
   Google Scholar
• Da Silva, F. P. (2014). Mental workload, task demand and driving performance: What relation? Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 162, 310–319. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.12.212
   Google Scholar
• Elgin, P. D., & Thomas, R. P. (2004). An integrated decision-making model for categorizing weather products and decision aids (NASA/TM-2004-212990). Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Hertzum, M., & Holmegaard, K. D. (2013). Perceived time as a measure of mental workload: Effects of time constraints and task success. International Journal of Human-computer Interaction, 29(1), 26–39. doi:10.1080/10447318.2012.676538
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hua, L., Ling, C., & Thomas, R. (2015). The effect of delayed radar information on pilots’ distance estimation. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 59(1), 150–154. doi:10.1177/1541931215591031
   Google Scholar
• Hunter, D. R. (2002). Risk perception and risk tolerance in aircraft pilots (DOT/FAA/AM-02/17). Washington, DC: Federal Aviation Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, W., Kronfeld, K., & Rand, T. (2000). Cockpit integration of uplinked weather radar imagery. Proceedings of the 19th Digital Avionics Systems Conference, 1: 3D4/1-3D4/6. doi: 10.1109/DASC.2000.886935.
   Google Scholar
• Latorella, K. A., & Chamberlain, J. P. (2002a). Tactical vs. strategic behavior: General aviation piloting in convective weather scenarios. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 46, 101. doi:10.1177/154193120204600121
   Google Scholar
• Latorella, K. A., & Chamberlain, J. P. (2002b). Graphical weather information system evaluation: Usability, perceived utility, and preferences from general aviation pilots (SAE Paper No. 2002-01-1521). Langley, VA: NASA Langley Research Center.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, R. J., & Penningroth, S. (1997). The effects of response format and other variables on comparisons of digital and dial displays. Human Factors, 39(3), 417–424. doi:10.1518/001872097778827061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Transportation Safety Board. (2006). U.S. general aviation, calendar year 2003. Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data.
   Google Scholar
• National Transportation Safety Board. (2008). U.S. general aviation, calendar year 2004. Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data.
   Google Scholar
• National Transportation Safety Board (2009). U.S. general aviation, calendar year 2005. Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data.
   Google Scholar
• National Transportation Safety Board. (2011). Cockpit display factual report (NTSB Number: ERA10MA188). Washington, DC: NTSB, Office of Aviation safety.
   Google Scholar
• Novacek, P. F., Burgess, M. A., Heck, M. L., & Stokes, A. F. (2001). The effect of ownership information and the NEXRAD resolution on pilot decision making in the use of a cockpit weather information display (NASA/CR-2001-210845). Hampton, VA: Research Triangle Inst.
   Google Scholar
• Sanders, M. S., & McCormick, E. J. (1993). Human factors in engineering and design. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Snodgrass, J. G., Levy-Berger, G., & Haydon, M. S. (1985). Human experimental psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Van Nes, F. L. (1972). Determining temporal differences with analogue and digital time displays. Ergonomics, 15, 73–79. doi:10.1080/00140137208924409
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vincent, M., Blickensderfer, E., Thomas, R., Smith, M., & Lanicci, J. (2013). In-cockpit NEXRAD products: Training general aviation pilots. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 57, 81. doi:10.1177/1541931213571020
   Google Scholar
• Wickens, C. D., Muthard, E. K., Alexander, A. L., Olffen, P. V., & Podczerwinski, E. (2003). The influences of display highlighting and size and event eccentricity for aviation surveillance. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 47, 149. doi:10.1177/154193120304700131
   Google Scholar
• Wiegmann, D., & Goh, J. (2000). Visual flight rules (VFR) flight into adverse weather: An empirical investigation of factors affecting pilot decision making (Technical Report ARL-00-15/FAA-00-8). Washington, DC: Federal Aviation Administration.
   Google Scholar
• Wise, J., Hopkin, V., & Garland, D. (Ed.). (2010). Handbook of aviation human factors. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor and Francis.
   Google Scholar
• Wu, S., Duong, C. G., Koteskey, R. W., & Johnson, W. W. (2011). Designing a flight deck predictive weather forecast interface supporting trajectory-based operations. Berlin, Germany: Ninth USA/Europe Air Traffic Management Research and Development Seminar (ATM2011).
   Google Scholar
• Yuchnovicz, D. E., Novacek, P. F., Burgess, M. A., Heck, M. L., & Stokes, A. F. (2001). Use of a data-linked weather information display and effects on pilot navigation decision making in a piloted simulation study (NASA/CR-2001-211047). Hampton, VA: NASA Langley Research Center.
   Google Scholar