Predicting pilot error: Testing a new methodology and a multi-methods and analysts approach

There are no files associated with this record.

Title Predicting pilot error: Testing a new methodology and a multi-methods and analysts approach
Author Stanton, Neville A.; Salmon, Paul; Harris, Don; Marshall, Andrew; Demagalski, Jason; Young, Mark S.; Waldmann, Thomas; Dekker, Sidney
Journal Name Applied Ergonomics
Year Published 2009
Place of publication United Kingdom
Publisher Elsevier
Abstract The Human Error Template (HET) is a recently developed methodology for predicting design-induced pilot error. This article describes a validation study undertaken to compare the performance of HET against three contemporary Human Error Identification (HEI) approaches when used to predict pilot errors for an approach and landing task and also to compare analyst error predictions to an approach to enhancing error prediction sensitivity: the multiple analysts and methods approach, whereby multiple analyst predictions using a range of HEI techniques are pooled. The findings indicate that, of the four methodologies used in isolation, analysts using the HET methodology offered the most accurate error predictions, and also that the multiple analysts and methods approach was more successful overall in terms of error prediction sensitivity than the three other methods but not the HET approach. The results suggest that when predicting design-induced error, it is appropriate to use a toolkit of different HEI approaches and multiple analysts in order to heighten error prediction sensitivity.
Peer Reviewed Yes
Published Yes
Alternative URI
Volume 40
Issue Number 3
Page from 464
Page to 471
ISSN 0003-6870
Date Accessioned 2011-07-14
Language en_AU
Faculty Arts, Education and Law
Subject Technology
Publication Type Journal Articles (Refereed Article)
Publication Type Code c1x

Show simple item record

Griffith University copyright notice