Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Cognitive conflicts in dynamic systems

  • Chapter
Structure for Dependability: Computer-Based Systems from an Interdisciplinary Perspective

  • 212 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aeronautica Civil of the Republic of Colombia (1996) Controlled flight into terrain American Airlines flight 965 Boeing 757-233, N651AA near Cali, Colombia, December 20, 1995 (Aircraft Accident Report)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Amalberti, R (1996). La conduite de systèmes à risques. Presses Universitaires de France, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bainbridge L (1987) Ironies of automation. In Rasmussen J, Duncan K, Leplat J (eds) New technology and human error. John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, UK, pp 271–283

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bass EJ, Small RL, Ernst-Fortin ST (1997) Knowledge requirements and architecture for an intelligent monitoring aid that facilitate incremental knowledge base development. In Potter D, Matthews M, Ali M (eds) Proceedings of the 10th international conference on industrial and engineering applications of artificial intelligence and expert systems. Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, pp 63–68

    Google Scholar 

  5. Besnard D and Greathead D (2003) A cognitive approach to safe violations. Cognition, Technology & Work, 5, 272–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Billings CE (1997) Aviation automation, LEA, Mahwah, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  7. Boeing (2004) Statistical summary of commercial jet airplane accidents. Worldwide operations 1959–2003. Airplane Safety, Boeing Commercial Airplanes. http://www.boeing.com/news/techissues/pdf/statsum.pdf (last accessed 12/05/2005)

    Google Scholar 

  8. Callantine T (2001) The crew activity tracking system: Leveraging flight data for aiding, training and analysis, Proceedings of the 20th Digital Avionics Systems Conference (vol 1). IEEE, Daytona Beach, pp 5C3/1–5C3/12)

    Google Scholar 

  9. de Keyser V, Woods DD (1990) Fixation errors: failures to revise situation assessment in dynamic and risky systems. In Colombo AG, Saiz de Bustamante A (eds) Systems reliability assessment, Kluwer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands, pp 231–251

    Google Scholar 

  10. Degani A (1997) On the types of modes in human-machine interactions, Proceedings of the ninth international symposium on aviation psychology. Columbus, OH

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dehais F (2004) Modélisation des conflits dans l’activité de pilotage. Doctoral dissertation, ONERA, France

    Google Scholar 

  12. Dehais F, Tessier C, Chaudron L (2003) GHOST: experimenting conflicts countermeasures in the pilot’s activity, Proceedings of the 18th joint conference on artificial intelligence. Acapulco, Mexico pp 163–168

    Google Scholar 

  13. Endsley M (1996) Automation and situation awareness. In Parasuraman R, Mouloua M (eds) Automation and human performance: Theory and applications. Lawrence Erlbaum, NJ, pp 163–181

    Google Scholar 

  14. FAA Human Factors Team (1996) The Interfaces Between Flightcrews and Modern Flight Deck Systems. Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  15. Frese M, Altmann A (1989) The treatment of errors in learning and training. In Bainbridge L, Ruiz Quintanilla SA (eds) Developing skills with information technology. Wiley, Chichester, UK, pp. 65–86

    Google Scholar 

  16. Helmreich B (2001) A closer inspection: What happens in the cockpit. Flight Safety Australia, January–February, 32–35

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hollnagel E, Woods DD (1983) Cognitive systems engineering: New wine in new bottles. International Journal of Man-machine Studies, 18, 583–600

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Jones C (2000) (Ed.) Preliminary version of conceptual model. Basic concepts. DSOS Project, deliverable BC1. Available online at http://www.newcastle.research.ec.org/dsos/deliverables/BC1.pdf (last accessed on 06/06/2005)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Leveson N, Palmer E (1997) Designing automation to reduce operator errors, Proceedings of IEEE Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. IEEE, Orlando, FL

    Google Scholar 

  20. Ministry of Transport (1996) Aircraft Accident Investigation Commission. China Airlines Airbus Industries A300B4-622R, B1816, Nagoya Airport, April 26, 1994. (Report 96-5). Ministry of Transport, Japan

    Google Scholar 

  21. Monnier A (1993) Rapport de la commission d’enquête sur l’accident survenu le 20 Janvier 1992. Ministère de la commission de l’Equipement, des Transports et du Tourisme, Paris, France

    Google Scholar 

  22. Moray N (1996) A taxonomy and theory of mental models. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 40th Annual Meeting (vol 1), Santa Monica, CA, pp. 164–168

    Google Scholar 

  23. NTSB (1997a) Grounding of the Panamanian passenger ship Royal Majesty on Rose and Crown shoal near Nantucket, Massachusetts, June 10, 1995 (Marine Accident Report NTSB/MAR-97/01). National Transportation Safety Board, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  24. NTSB (1997b) Wheels-up Landing, Continental Airlines Flight 1943, Douglas DC-9-32, N10556, Houston, Texas, February 19, 1996 (Accident Report AAR-97/01). National Transportation Safety Board, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  25. Olson WA, Sarter N (2000) Automation management strategies: Pilots preferences and operational experiences. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 10, 327–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Onken R (1997) The cockpit assistant system CASSY as an on-board player in the ATM environment, Proceedings of first air traffic management research and development seminar. Saclay, France

    Google Scholar 

  27. Palmer E (1995) Oops it didn’t arm. A case study of two automation surprises. In: Proceedings of the 8th symposium on Aviation Psychology, Ohio state University, Colombus, OH

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pew RW, Mavor AS (1998) Modeling human and organizational behavior. National Academy Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  29. Prevot T, Palmer EA (2000) Staying ahead of the automation: a vertical situation display can help. SAE Technical paper 2000-01-5614. 2000 World Aviation Conference, San Diego, CA

    Google Scholar 

  30. Ranter H (2005) Airliner accident statistics 2004. Aviation Safety Network. http://aviation-safety.net/pubs/asn/asn_overview_2004.pdf (last accessed on 09/06/2005).

    Google Scholar 

  31. Rasmussen J (1986) Information processing and human-machine interaction: An approach to cognitive engineering. North Holland, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  32. Reason J (1990) Human error. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  33. Ritter FE, Shadbolt NR, Elliman D, Young RM, Gobet F, Baxter G (2003) Techniques for modeling human performance in synthetic environments: A supplementary review. Human Systems Information Analysis Center, Dayton, OH

    Google Scholar 

  34. Rodriguez M, Zimmerman M, Katahira M, de Villepin M, Ingram B, Leveson N (2000) Identifying mode confusion potential in software design. In: Proceedings of the Digital Aviation Systems Conference, IEEE, Philadelphia, PA

    Google Scholar 

  35. Rouse WB, Geddes ND, Hammer JM. (1990) Computer-aided fighter pilots. IEEE Spectrum, 27:38–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rudisill M (1995) Line pilots’ attitudes about and experience with flight deck automation: results of an international survey and proposed guidelines. Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, The Ohio State University Press, Columbus, OH

    Google Scholar 

  37. Rushby J (1999) Using model checking to help discover mode confusions and other automation surprises. In Javaux D, de Keyser V (eds), The 3rd Workshop on Human Error, Safety and System Development. Liege, Belgium

    Google Scholar 

  38. Rushby J, Crow J, Palmer E (1999) An automated method to detect potential mode confusions, Proceedings of the 18th AIAA/IEEE Digital Avionics Systems Conference. IEEE, St Louis, MO

    Google Scholar 

  39. Sala-Oliveras C (2002) Systems, advisory systems and safety. Technical report CS-TR 774, University of Newcastle upon Tyne

    Google Scholar 

  40. Sarter N, Woods DD (1995) How in the world did we ever get into that mode? Mode error and awareness in supervisory control. Human Factors, 37:5–19

    Google Scholar 

  41. Sarter NB, Woods DD, Billings CE (1997) Automation Surprises. In Salvendy G (ed) Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics (2nd ed.). Wiley, New York, pp 1926–1943

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne

    Denis Besnard

  2. University of York, York

    Gordon Baxter

Authors
  1. Denis Besnard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Gordon Baxter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computing Science Claremont Tower, University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, UK

    Denis Besnard , Cristina Gacek  & Cliff B. Jones ,  & 

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag London Limited

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Besnard, D., Baxter, G. (2006). Cognitive conflicts in dynamic systems. In: Besnard, D., Gacek, C., Jones, C.B. (eds) Structure for Dependability: Computer-Based Systems from an Interdisciplinary Perspective. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-111-3_6

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-84628-111-3_6

  • Publisher Name: Springer, London

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-84628-110-5

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-84628-111-2

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation