Air Traffic Control Investigation - Research Paper Example

? OPTION 2: Air Traffic Control Task A Responses to Questions Question Why is it important to examine prospective memory and to develop prospective memory aids in simulations of work settings such as air traffic control? Prospective memory is the act of remembering and doing tasks at some appropriate point in the future (Loft, Smith, & Bhaskara, 2011). Prospective memory is used by most people on a daily basis to plan tasks and attend to them. But the use of prospective memory takes a toll on cognitive resources. The effort involved in remembering the task and the time at which it needs to be performed require effort which detracts from the resources available for ongoing tasks. Studies that have measured the effect of prospective memory on ongoing tasks show that people respond somewhat slower on ongoing tasks and experience task interference when they are required to remember things to do in the near future (Loft, Smith, & Bhaskara, 2011). Also, people sometimes forget the information stored a prospective memory when they choose to concentrate on the ongoing tasks, leading to those instructions not being followed. Alternately, they may substitute the intended task with a more routine task. Most people use prospective memory to remember important but non-critical activities like speaking to someone, buying food on the way home, or mentioning something of interest during a scheduled future conversation. But some people are required to remember tasks that are critical to their lives as well as to the lives of other. This includes air traffic controllers, paramedics, pilots, train drivers and others. These persons are required to conduct relatively complex tasks while remembering to use special instructions when specific conditions present themselves within the tasks at hand. Even the slightest mistake on the part of these persons in using instructions stored as prospective memory can put multiple lives at risk. Thus, it becomes important to understand how prospective memory affects functioning on ongoing tasks and how the use of prospective memory can be aided to reduce chances of forgetting. One way to improve prospective memory and reduce the strain associated with its use is to develop memory aids that can provide reminders at an opportune time (for instance just before or at the time when the intended actions is to be performed). Research by Loft and Remington (2010) has shown that the use of external aids reduces the errors in the performance of critical intended tasks by air traffic controllers, as well as in other more generalized conditions (Hicks, Marsh, & Cook, 2005). The Loft, Smith and Bhaskara (2011) study also shows that the use of external aids that cue participants just as the intended task is required reduced the interference of prospective memory in ongoing tasks. Developing such memory aids in simulations of work that are used to train persons working in critical industries like that of the air traffic controllers can help train participants to multitask efficiently without overwhelming their resources. Using memory aids would allow the trainee using the simulation to develop rapid responses to situations as they occur in the dynamic work environment with minimum error (Loft, Smith, & Bhaskara, 2011). Using simulations also allows trainees to identify situations in which their responses are inadequate and to practice these situations in greater detail (Gray, 2002). Thus, these trainees would be able to acquire and transfer skills to their work environment. Question 2: What research questions does the study you participated in investigate over and above Experiment 2 conducted by Loft, Smith, & Bhaskara (2011)? Why are these additional research questions important? The present study included data about the personality of the participant and the degree of trust in the automation. These variables allow the researcher to verify whether there are any relationships between the personality of the participant and the extent to which external aids will help them in reducing errors and enhancing the speed and number of correct responses. The data shall also help verify if the degree of trust in the automation is associated with reduced response time and increased accuracy. There is an intuitive relationship between the degree of trust that the participant has in the automation and the likelihood that they will rely on it to help them negotiate difficult or critical situations. The use of the automaton will help people reduce their cognitive load due to prospective memory; and will allow them to respond to ongoing tasks faster and more accurately since they will not be distracted (Loft, Smith, & Bhaskara, 2011). If the participant believes that the automaton will accurately provide a cue when specific conditions present themselves; then they are more likely to trust the automaton and use it to reduce their cognitive load (Dixon & Wickens, 2006). On the other hand, if the automaton is found to have be miss-prone (it does not always detect the special conditions / it does not warn the user in time) (Dixon & Wickens, 2006), then it is less likely that the user will trust the automaton to cue them for each event, and will continue to expend the same or more resources in verifying each case regardless of whether the automaton cues them or not (Loft, Smith, & Bhaskara, 2011). Thus, it is likely that the trust that participants have in the automated aid system will be associated with the speed with which they respond to both ongoing and intended tasks as well as with the accuracy of attending to these tasks. It would therefore be expected that higher trust would be associated with lower response time and lower error rate. Not only does trust in the automaton mediate the relationship between the use of external memory aids on one hand and speed and accuracy of response of the other; but it is possible that personality also plays a role. Some people take time to trust new devices or technology; and thus, would take more time to accept the inputs of an external aid system while others may trust the system without testing it too rigorously. For example, typically, people with high openness to experience wound be ready to try new methods more easily as compared to someone lower on the trait (Matthews, Deary & Whiteman, 2003). Similarly, a person high on contentiousness would want to be sure of the situation before taking a decision or providing a response as compared to some one low on the trait (Matthews, Deary & Whiteman, 2003). Thus, some participants in such tasks would find it easier to use the automaton as compared to others, and some participants would be able to trust it more easily than others. It is also important to note that while not all personality variables may be associated with the use of external aids specifically; some personality profiles lend themselves to handling stress better and adapting to situations rapidly while others don’t (Matthews, Deary & Whiteman, 2003). While professionals in fields that require such responses may be chosen for their specific traits; it is more difficult to ensure that research participants would fit the personality profile. Thus, data on personality can help in identifying what aspects of personality affect responses to critical situations and how these interpersonal differences and affect performance of individuals and thus, the research data. Question 3: What are the potential benefits and limitations in using results from laboratory simulations of work tasks to inform practice in operational settings? Simulations are becoming popular among researchers who wish to study practical applications of theories and who wish to provide conditions that mimic the real world conditions without the real world costs associated with these situations (Gray, 2002). The results from these studies are often later used to develop models of how people function under different circumstances and thus, to make policy choices in the real world (DiFonzo, Hantula & Bordia, 1998). There are a number of benefits to using simulations in research that is later used to make practice based choices and decisions. Simulations allow the researcher to control the extent of complexity and realism as well as to increase and decrease the same as required (DiFonzo, Hantula & Bordia, 1998). Thus, simulations allow the researcher to achieve an optimal degree of complexity that allows the researcher to exert the necessary amount of experimental control over the testing phase (Gray, 2002). In the real world, a number of unexpected factors can affect the reliability of the data (DiFonzo, Hantula & Bordia, 1998); while a simulation not only allows the experimenter to control these factors, but also to study their effect on the data by varying them systematically (Gray, 2002). Typical laboratory studies present data that has little external validity, while filed studies rarely allow for experimental manipulation. Simulations provide a near-real experience to participants, thus encouraging the belief that their responses are closer to real world conditions when using a simulation (DiFonzo, Hantula & Bordia, 1998). Although it cannot be disputed that simulations can be valuable research tools, they do have some limitations. The mote important one is that usually participants in research studies are aware that they are using a simulation (Gray, 2002) and that any negative consequences of their choices shall not be permanent in any way. This may make the person more risk-taking during a simulation as compared to a real world condition, or may make the person fixate on particular aspects of the task(s) at hand. At such times, data collected from observations in the real world may be more representative of the typical responses provided (Gray, 2002). Laboratory studies help isolate the effect of single factors (Gray, 2002); which is valuable information when trying to identify the contribution of particular conditions. Although simulations allow for a great deal of experimental control; it is almost as difficult to isolate the effects of individual factors in simulations as it is in field studies. Another concern is that participants in research studies are often naive to the requirements of the real world conditions that the simulation tries to represent (Gray, 2002); and their responses and choices may differ from those of professionals who perform the same high stress activities on a daily basis. Thus, there can be significant issues in generalizing from the data collected on such subjects to professionals who may behave differently if presented with the same set of conditions. References DiFonzo, N., Hantula, D. A., & Bordia, P. (1998). Microworlds for experimental research: Having your (control and collection) cake, and realism too. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 30, 278-286. Dixon, S. R., & Wickens, C. D. (2006). Automation reliability in unmanned aerial vehicle ontrol: A reliance-compliance model of automation dependence in high workload. Human Factors, 48, 474 – 486. Gray, W. D. (2002). Simulated task environments: The role of high-fidelity simulations, scaled worlds, synthetic environments, and microworlds in basic and applied cognitive research. Cognitive Science Quarterly, 2, 205-227. Hicks, J. L., Marsh, R. L., & Cook, G. I. (2005). Task interference in time-based, event-based, and dual intention prospective memory conditions. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 430 – 444. Loft, S., Smith, R. E., & Bhaskara, A. (2011). Prospective memory in an air traffic control simulation: External aids that signal when to act. The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17, 60-70. Loft, S., & Remington, R. W. (2010). Prospective memory and task interference in a continuous monitoring dynamic display task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 16, 145–157. Matthews, G., Deary, I. J., & Whiteman, M. C. (2003).Personality Traits. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Read More