Sunday, November 17, 2019

Interaction types in the Cockpit


Interaction types in the Cockpit
coaching, dominance, and intersubjectivity

From UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO Cognition in Flight: Understanding Cockpits as Cognitive Systems

A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in Cognitive Science by Barbara E. Holder

An interaction analysis was developed to identify three system-level properties. These properties are emergent interaction patterns I named coaching, dominance, and intersubjectivity. These patterns emerged from individual interactions in the system and were not produced by a single pilot. The data suggest these patterns influence system performance and flight safety.
...
Interactive processes do not occur in isolation, they occur simultaneously across social, physical, and conceptual dimensions and shape system interactions. These findings have implications for display design, training, meaning construction, and crew coordination.
...
Coaching occurs when one pilot transforms representations into statements that are supportive of a specific task of the other pilot, such as controlling the aircraft. During a coaching interaction there tends to be heavy flow of representations from the instrument panel to the copilot and then to the pilot. Coaching statements may be given as directives 38 38 (“get that nose over”) or as status (“that’s a good rate”) or as reassurance (“you've got it”). The pilot being coached may verbally acknowledge the statements or acknowledge them through his actions. The coaching pilot monitors the other pilot’s actions and continues to coach as required. Coaching interactions tend to vary in duration because pilots transition in and out of coaching to perform other tasks such as verifying a mechanical failure. The notion of coaching is represented in the pilot community in the phrase back each other up.
...
A dominance interaction occurs when one pilot does everything—processes instrument representations, speaks, acts, decides, without assistance or concurrence from his partner. The other pilot tends to remain a passive partner even if he was not passive before. This pattern is often characterized by a unidirectional flow of representations centering on one pilot. Pilots construct an understanding of the situation independent of each other and the understanding of the dominant pilot may sway the understanding of the other pilot. Communication between pilots tends to be one-sided flowing from the dominating pilot to the other pilot with little or no opportunity for negotiation and discussion. These kinds of interactions are known to be dangerous and are addressed in the navy’s aircrew coordination training under assertiveness. Assertiveness is defined in the programs as: the willingness one has to take action and to actively participate. All members of the crew, pilots and aircrewmen, receive some kind of assertiveness training.
...
The last interaction pattern is intersubjectivity as the emergence of a shared understanding between pilots. Hutchins and Klausen (1996), documented the emergence of intersubjectivity between crewmembers flying a commercial airplane. These interactions occur when both pilots make relevant contributions in terms of speech and 40 40 action to a joint activity. We see abbreviated sentences, overlapping speech, and actions in response to an understanding not a command. The interaction may vary in length and intensity and may incorporate coaching. The exchange transitions into parallel coordination when the pilots begin another separate, but contextually appropriate, activity following an interaction. Parallel coordination occurs when both pilots perform separate, complimentary activities in parallel such as one pilot performing checks while the other calls air traffic control. Intersubjective interactions usually occur during intense activity, like during a diagnosis, detection of a malfunction, or when the crew is regaining aircraft control. These are periods where crew coordination is essential. The closest term to intersubjectivity in the training program is synergy, but it is not clearly defined nor is it used to describe behavior outside of the books. It is not surprising that this is a more difficult phenomenon to conceptualize in training terms.