Future Ability Requirements for Human Operators in Aviation

  • Catrin Hasse
  • Carmen Bruder
  • Dietrich Grasshoff
  • Hinnerk Eißfeldt
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5639)


The present study addresses the optimal fit between technical innovations in aviation and aircraft operators. Because of the increase in computerization, an accurate and efficient monitoring of the automation poses a key challenge to future operators. As the German Aerospace Center’s Department of Aviation and Space Psychology is responsible for personnel selection of pilots and air traffic controllers, our objective for the selection of future personnel is to distinguish good monitoring operators from bad operators. In order to identify good monitoring behavior we developed a simulation tool that represents tasks of pilots and controllers within a dynamic air traffic flow. Participants have either to monitor the automatic process or to control the dynamic traffic manually. Monitoring behavior is measured by recording eye movement parameters. The identification of accurate monitoring behavior enables us to adapt selection profiles to future ability requirements.


automation monitoring behavior human performance personnel selection eye tracking future ATM 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bruder, C., Jörn, L., Eißfeldt, H.: Aviator 2030 - When pilots and air traffic controllers discuss their future. In: Proceedings of the EAAP conference, Valencia, Spain (2008) (in press)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chapman, P., Underwood, G.: Visual Search of Dynamic Scenes: Event Types and the Role of Experience in Viewing Driving Situations. In: Underwood, G. (ed.) Eye guidance in reading and scene perception. Elsevier, Oxford (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Crundall, D., Underwood, G., Chapman, P.: Driving experience and functional field of view. Perception 18, 1075–1087 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eißfeldt, H., Heintz, A.: Ability Requirements for DFS Controllers – Current and Future. In: Eißfeldt, H., Heil, M.C., Broach, D. (eds.) Staffing the ATM System, Ashgate, Burlington (2002)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Endsley, M.R., Bolte, B., Jones, D.G.: Designing for situation awareness – An approach to user-centered design. Taylor & Francis, New York (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Funk, K., Lyall, B., Wilson, J., Vint, R., Niemczyk, M., Suroteguh, C., Owen, G.: Flight deck automation issues. International Journal of Aviation Psychology 9, 109–123 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Manning, C.A., Broach, D.: Identifying ability requirements for operators of future automated air traffic control systems. DOT/FAA/AM-87/26. Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC (1992)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mogford, R.H.: Mental models and situation awareness in air traffic control. International journal of aviation psychology 7, 331–341 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Murmaw, R.J., Nikolic, M.I., Sarter, N.B., Wickens, C.D.: A simulator study of pilots monitoring strategies and performance on modern glass cockpit aircraft. In: Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Minneapolis, USA (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Niessen, C., Eyferth, K.: A model of the air traffic controllers’ picture. Safety Science 73, 187–202 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T.B., Wickens, C.D.: Situation awareness, mental workload, and trust in automation: Viable, empirically supported cognitive engineering constructs. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making 2, 140–160 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Singh, I.L., Molloy, R., Parasuraman, R.: Automation-induced “complacency”: Development of the complacency-potential rating scale. International Journal of Aviation Psychology 3, 111–122 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Underwood, G., Chapman, P., Brocklehurst, N., Underwood, J., Crundall, D.: Visual Attention while driving: Sequences of eye fixations made by experienced and novice drivers. Ergonomics 46, 629–646 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Whitfield, D., Jackson, A.: The air traffic controller’s picture as an example of mental models. In: Johannsen, G., Rijnsdorp, J.E. (eds.) Proceedings of the IFAC Conference on Analysis, Design, and Evaluation of Man-Machine Systems (45–52). Pergamon Press, London (1982)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wickens, C.D., Helleberg, J., Goh, J., Xu, X., Horrey, B.: Pilot task management: Testing an attentional expected value model of visual scanning (ARL-01-14/NASA-01-7). University of Illinois, Aviation Research Lab, Savoy (2001)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wickens, C.D., Mavor, A.S., Parasuraman, R., McGee, J.P.: The future of air traffic control: Human operators and automation. National Academic Press, London (1998)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Woods, D.D., Sarter, N.B.: Learning from automation surprises and “going sour” accidents. In: Sarter, N.B., Amalberti, R. (eds.) Cognitive Engineering in the Aviation Domain, pp. 327–353. LEA, Hillsdale (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Catrin Hasse
    • 1
  • Carmen Bruder
    • 1
  • Dietrich Grasshoff
    • 1
  • Hinnerk Eißfeldt
    • 1
  1. 1.German Aerospace CenterDepartment of Aviation and Space PsychologyHamburgGermany

Personalised recommendations