Abstract
It is increasingly being recognized that the flight crew’s team situation awareness (TSA) is essential for flight safety. To explore the inherent correlation and hierarchical structure of the flight crew’s TSA, 21 influencing factors were extracted from individuals, flight crew, equipment, environment, management, and task perspectives based on the Delphi Method and flight accident investigation. By absorbing the advantages of Decision Making Trial and Evaluation (DEMATEL) and Interpretive Structure Modeling (ISM), the influencing degree, the influenced degree, the centrality, and the causality of each influencing factor were calculated to find out the key factors and the cause-and-effect relationship; a multi-level hierarchical model was established for analyzing the interaction mechanism of the flight crew’s TSA. The results show: (i) for the formation and maintenance of the flight crew’s TSA, among the 21 influencing factors, task property, safety consciousness, workload, communication, coordination, physiological, and mental state are the most important influencing factors; (ii) the multi-level hierarchical model is divided into five layers and reflects the function pathway. Attention, memory, and safety consciousness are the direct causes of the failure of the flight crew’s TSA. Regulatory policy, safety culture, and training can be considered upon as the deepest and fundamental influencing factors affecting the flight crew’s TSA; (iii) the mutual influencing degree of elements and the cause-and-effect relationship are quantificationally presented to better reveal the inherent correlation. This study provides a workable reference for analyzing the flight crew’s TSA and offers a novel decision-making approach to support better flight safety management by priority actions.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ackerman RK (2005) Army intelligence digitizes situational awareness. Signal 59(11):23–26
Adams MJ, Tenney YJ, Pew RW (1995) Situation awareness and the cognitive management of complex systems. Hum Factors 37(1):85–104
Banbury S, Tremblay S (2017) A cognitive approach to situation awareness: theory and application. Routledge, pp 15–16
Banbury S, Dudfield H, Hoermann HJ, Soll H (2007) FASA: Development and validation of a novel measure to assess the effectiveness of commercial airline pilot situation awareness training. Int J Aviat Psychol 17(2):131–152
Brennan PA, Holden C, Shaw G, Morris S, Oeppen RS (2020) Leading article: what can we do to improve individual and team situational awareness to benefit patient safety? Brit J Oral Max Surg 58(4):404–408
Cebi S (2013) Determining importance degrees of website design parameters based on interactions and types of websites. Decis Support Syst 54(2):1030–1043
Dragan K, Georges L, Mustafa K (2017) Organization: a new focus on mine safety improvement in a complex operational and business environment. Int J Min Sci Techno 27(4):617–625
Durso FT, Nickerson RS, Dumais ST, Lewandowsky S, Perfect TJ (2007) Handbook of applied cognition. Wiley, pp 93–95
Endsley MR (1995b) Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Hum Factor 37(1):32–64
Endsley MR (2006) Situation awareness handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 3rd edn. Wiley, pp 528–542
Endsley MR, Robertson MM (1996) Team situation awareness in aviation maintenance. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet 21:1077–1081
Endsley MR (1995a) A taxonomy of situation awareness errors. human factors in aviation operations. Proceedings of the 21st Conference of the European Association for Aviation Psychology (EAAP) 3(2):287–292
Falatoonitoosi E, Z ZL, And SS, Salimi M, (2013) Decision-making trial and evaluation laboratory. Res J Appl Sci Eng Technol 5(13):3476–3480
Flach JM (1995) Situation awareness: proceed with caution. Hum Factors 37(1):149–157
Fu B, Liu W, Liu X (2019) Influence of cognitive ability on task performance of dynamic decision making in military vehicles under different task complexity. Cogn Technol Work 21:445–455
Gibson J, Orasanu J, Villeda E, Nygren TE (1997) Loss of situation awareness- Causes and consequences. The Proceeding of the Eighth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology, Columbus, OH,. pp 1417–1422
International Civil Aviation Organization (2020) Effects of novel coronavirus (COVID-19) on civil aviation: economic impact analysis. Montreal, pp 3–5
Ivošević J, Bucak T, Andraši P (2018) Effects of interior aircraft noise on pilot performance. Appl Acoust 139:8–13
Kilingaru K, Tweedale JW, Thatcher S, Jain LC (2013) Monitoring pilot “situation awareness.” J Intell Fuzzy Syst 24(3):457–466
Leveson NG (2011) Applying systems thinking to analyze and learn from events. Saf Sci 49(1):55–64
Li Y, Hu Y, Zhang X, Deng Y, Mahadevan S (2014) An evidential dematel method to identify critical success factors in emergency management. Appl Soft Comput 22(5):504–510
Li PC, Li XF, Zhang XF, Dai LC, Jin X (2019) A study on team situation awareness errors in digital nuclear power plants. Ind Eng Manag 24(2):183–197
Li PC, Wang YX, Chen JH, Luo ZH, Dai LC (2021) An experimental study on the effects of task complexity and knowledge and experience level on SA. TSA and Workload. Nuclear Eng Design 376:111112
Liang N, Yang J, Yu D, Prakah-Asante KO (2021) Using eye-tracking to investigate the effects of pre-takeover visual engagement on situation awareness during automated driving. Accid Anal Prev 157(1):106143
Lo JC (2013) SA Measuring group situation awareness in a multiactor gaming simulation: a pilot study of railway and passenger traffic operators. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet 1:177–181
Looseley A, Hotoura A, Keogh M (2009) Patient safety and the aviation model: medicine is still learning. Int J Risk Saf Med 21(3):131–137
Marquardt N (2019) The effect of locus of control on organizational learning, situation awareness and safety culture. Nova Science Publishers, pp 157–218
McNeese NJ, Cooke NJ, She M (2021) Team situation awareness and conflict: A study of human-machine teaming. J Cogn Eng Decis Mak 1:15553434211017354
Mohammadfam I, Mahdinia M, Soltanzadeh A, Aliabadi MM (2021) A path analysis model of individual variables predicting safety behavior and human error: The mediating effect of situation awareness. Int J Ind Ergonom 84(3):103144
Nonose K, Kanno T, Furuta K (2010) An evaluation method of team situation awareness based on mutual belief. Cogn Technol Work 12(1):31–40
Patrick J, James N, Ahmed A, Halliday P (2006) Observational assessment of situation awareness, team differences and training implications. Ergonomics 49(4):393–417
Prince C, Salas E (2000) Team situation awareness, errors, and crew resource management: Research integration for training guidance. Situation awareness analysis and measurement. CRC Press, pp 325–347
Prince C, Ellis E, Brannick MT, Salas E (2007) Measurement of team situation awareness in low experience level aviators. Int J Aviat Psychol 17(1):41–57
Salas E, Prince C, Baker DP, Shrestha L (1995) Situation awareness in team performance: implications for measurement and training. Hum Factors 37(1):123–136
Salmon PM, Stanton NA, Walker GH, Baber C, Jenkins DP, Mcmaster R, Young MS (2008) What really is going on? Review of situation awareness models for individuals and teams. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 9(4):297–323
Salmon PM, Walker GH, Stanton NA (2015) Broken components versus broken systems: why it is systems not people that lose situation awareness. Cogn Technol Work 17(2):179–183
Salmon PM, Walker GH, Stanton NA (2016) Pilot error versus sociotechnical systems failure: a distributed situation awareness analysis of air france 447. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 17(2):1–16
Samima S, Sarma M, Samanta D, Prasad G (2019) Estimation and quantification of vigilance using ERPs and eye blink rate with a fuzzy model-based approach. Cogn Technol Work 21(3):517–533
Seppanen H, Mkel J, Luokkala P, Virrantaus K (2013) Developing shared situational awareness for emergency management. Saf Sci 55(6):1–9
Shi YS, Huang WF, Tian ZQ (2017) Team situation awareness: the concept, models and measurements. Space Med Eng 30(6):463–468
Shu YF, Furuta K (2005) An inference method of team situation awareness based on mutual awareness. Cogn Technol Work 7(4):272–287
Smith K, Hancock PA (1995) Situation awareness is adaptive, externally directed consciousness. Hum Factors 37(1):137–148
Sperling BK (2006) Information distribution and team situational awareness: an experimental study. Proc Hum Factors Ergon Soc Annu Meet 3:477–481
Stanton NA, Stewart R, Harris D, Houghton RJ, Baber C (2006) Distributed situation awareness in dynamic systems: theoretical development and application of an ergonomics methodology. Ergonomics 49(12–13):1288–1311
Stanton NA, Salmon PM, Walker GH, Salas E, Hancock PA (2017) State-of-science: situation awareness in individuals, teams and systems. Ergonomics 60(4):449–466
Trapsilawati F, Herliansyah M, Nugraheni A, Fatikasari M, Tissamodie G (2019) EEG-based analysis of air traffic conflict: Investigating controllers’ situation awareness, stress level and brain activity during conflict resolution. J Nav 73:1–19
Vanderhaegen F (2001) Non-probabilistic prospective and retrospective human reliability analysis method - application to railway system. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 71:1–13
Vanderhaegen F (2021) Heuristic-based method for conflict discovery of shared control between humans and autonomous systems - A driving automation case study. Robot Auto Syst 146:103867
Vanderhaegen F, Zieba S, Enjalbert S, Polet P (2011) A Benefit/Cost/Deficit (BCD) model for learning from human errors. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 96(7):757–766
Vanderhaegen F, Wolff M, Mollard R (2020) Non-conscious errors in the control of dynamic events synchronized with heartbeats: a new challenge for human reliability study. Saf Sci 129(6):1–11
Vannucci A, Kras JF (2013) Decision making, situation awareness, and communication skills in the operating room. Int Anesthesiol Clin 51(1):105–127
Walker GH, Stanton NA, Kazi TA, Salmon PM, Jenkins DP (2009) Does advanced driver training improve situational awareness? Appl Ergon 40(4):678–687
Wang YQ, Liu CQ, Li M (2019) Experimental study on flight crew’s team situation awareness based on team mutual belief model. Sci Technol Eng 19(13):305–311
Wei HY, Zhuang DM, Wanyan XR (2013) An experimental analysis of situation awareness for cockpit display interface evaluation based on flight simulation. Chinese J Aeronaut 26(4):884–889
Wiegmann DA, Shappell SA (2017) A human error approach to aviation accident analysis: the human factors analysis and classification system. Routledge, pp 23–34
Xie KF, Liu ZM (2019) Factors influencing escalator-related incidents in china: a systematic analysis using ism-dematel method. Int J Env Res Pub He 16(4):2478
Yan S, Yao K, Congchi T (2021) Using artificial neural network for predicting and evaluating situation awareness of operator. IEEE Access 99:1–1
Yang JZ, Zhang K (2004) Situation awareness: approaches, measures and applications. Adv Psychol Sci 6:842–850
Zhang PK, Luo F (2017) Influencing factors of runway incursion risk and their interaction mechanism based on DEMATEL–ISM. Tehn Vjesnik Techn Gazette 24(6):1853–2186
Acknowledgements
This work was supported by key scientific research projects of colleges and universities of Henan Province (17A630069); key technology projects for the prevention and control of serious and especially serious accidents in safety production (Henan-0012-2017AQ).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Meng, B., Lu, N., Lin, C. et al. Study on the influencing factors of the flight crew’s TSA based on DEMATEL–ISM method. Cogn Tech Work 24, 275–289 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-021-00688-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-021-00688-7