Human Performance of Novice Schedulers for Complex Spaceflight Operations Timelines

Abstract

Objective

Investigate the effects of scheduling task complexity on human performance for novice schedulers creating spaceflight timelines.

Background

Future astronauts will be expected to self-schedule, yet will not be experts in creating timelines that meet the complex constraints inherent to spaceflight operations.

Method

Conducted a within-subjects experiment to evaluate scheduling task performance in terms of scheduling efficiency, effectiveness, workload, and situation awareness while manipulating scheduling task complexity according to the number of constraints and type of constraints.

Results

Each participant (n = 15) completed a set of scheduling problems. Results showed main effects of the number of constraints and type of constraint on efficiency, effectiveness, and workload. Significant interactions were observed in situation awareness and workload for certain types of constraints. Results also suggest that a lower number of constraints may be manageable by novice schedulers when compared to scheduling activities without constraints.

Conclusion

Results suggest that novice schedulers' performance decreases with a high number of constraints, and future scheduling aids may need to target a specific type of constraint.

Application

Knowledge on the effect of scheduling task complexity will help design scheduling systems that will enable self-scheduling for future astronauts. It will also inform other domains that conduct complex scheduling, such as nursing and manufacturing.

Keywords

scheduling computer-supported collaborations analysis and evaluation multivariate analysis

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ackerman

P. L.

Schneider

Wickens

C. D.

(1984). Deciding the existence of a time-sharing ability: A combined methodological and theoretical approach. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 26(1), 71–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088402600107

Argenziano

Fischkoff

Smith

C. R.

(2020). Surgery scheduling in a crisis. New England Journal of Medicine, 382(23), e87. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc2017424

Bailyn

Collins

Song

(2007). Self-scheduling for hospital nurses: An attempt and its difficulties. Journal of Nursing Management, 15(1), 72–77. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2934.2006.00633.x

Bellenkes

A. H.

Wickens

C. D.

Kramer

A. F.

(1997). Visual scanning and pilot expertise: The role of attentional flexibility and mental model development. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 68(7), 569-579.

H.-J.

Zhang

Luo

Y.-Z.

(2016). Constraint satisfaction and optimization for space station short-term mission planning based on an iterative conflict-repair method. Engineering Optimization, 48(10), 1658–1678. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305215X.2015.1137566

Cardoen

Demeulemeester

Beliën

(2009). Sequencing surgical cases in a day-care environment: An exact branch-and-price approach. Computers & Operations Research, 36(9), 2660–2669. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2008.11.012

Castro

P. M.

Marques

(2015). Operating room scheduling with generalized disjunctive programming. Computers & Operations Research, 64, 262–273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cor.2015.06.002

Chau

K. W.

Anson

Zhang

J. P.

(2004). Four-dimensional visualization of construction scheduling and site utilization. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 130(4), 598–606. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9364(2004)130:4(598)

Cheeseman

Kanefsky

Taylor

W. M.

(1991). Where the really hard problems are. Proceedings of the 12th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence -Volume 1, 331–337.

10.

Dempsey

R. C.

(Ed.) (2018). The International Space Station: Operating an Outpost in the New Frontier. National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

11.

Durso

F. T.

Truitt

T. R.

Hackworth

C. A.

Crutchfield

J. M.

Nikolic

Moertl

P. M.

Ohrt

Manning

C. A.

(1995). Expertise and chess: A pilot study comparing situation awareness methodologies. In Garland

Endsley

M. R.

(Eds.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Experimental Analysis and Measurement of Situation Awareness (pp. 295–303).

12.

Edwards

Brandt

Marquez

(2021). Towards a measure of situation awareness for space mission schedulers. In AHFE 2021 International Conference. Virtual Event. Springer.

13.

Endsley

M. R.

(2021). A systematic review and meta-analysis of direct objective measures of situation awareness: A comparison of SAGAT and SPAM. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 63(1), 124–150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720819875376

14.

Erdem

Shi

(2012). Rescheduling of elective patients upon the arrival of emergency patients. Decision Support Systems, 54(1), 551–563. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dss.2012.08.002

15.

Erdfelder

Faul

Buchner

(1996). GPOWER: A general power analysis program. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03203630

16.

Erdogan

S. A.

Denton

B. T.

(2011). Surgery planning and scheduling. In Cochran

J. J.

Cox

L. A.

Keskinocak

Kharoufeh

J. P.

Smith

J. C.

(Eds.), Wiley Encyclopedia of Operations Research and Management Science. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470400531.eorms0861

17.

Evans

J. D.

(1996). Straightforward statistics for the behavioral sciences. Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.

18.

Fritz

M. S.

MacKinnon

D. P.

(2007). Required sample size to detect the mediated effect. Psychological Science, 18(3), 233–239. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01882.x

19.

Hart

S. G.

(2006). NASA-task load index (NASA-TLX); 20 years later. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 50(9), 904–908. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120605000909

20.

Hart

S. G.

Staveland

L. E.

(1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In Advances in Psychology (Vol. 52, pp. 139–183). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9

21.

Hashemi Doulabi

S. H.

Rousseau

L.-M.

Pesant

(2016). A constraint-programming-based branch-and-price-and-cut approach for operating room planning and scheduling. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 28(3), 432–448. https://doi.org/10.1287/ijoc.2015.0686

22.

Kanas

(2015). Autonomy and the crew-ground interaction. In Kanas

(Ed.), Humans in Space (pp. 99–107). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18869-0_9

23.

Kanefsky

Zheng

Deliz

Marquez

J. J.

Hillenius

(2018). Playbook data analysis tool: Collecting interaction data from extremely remote users. In Ahram

Falcão

(Eds.), Advances in Usability and User Experience (pp. 303–313). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60492-3_29.

24.

Lee

Marquez

Edwards

(2021, January 11). Crew autonomy through self-scheduling: Scheduling performance pilot study [Paper presentation]. AIAA Scitech 2021 Forum, VIRTUAL EVENT. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2021-1578

25.

Marques

Captivo

M. E.

Pato

M. V.

(2012). Planning elective surgeries in a Portuguese hospital: Study of different mutation rules for a genetic heuristic. Lecture Notes in Management Science, 4, 238-243.

26.

Marquez

J. J.

Hillenius

Healy

Silva-Martinez

(2019). Lessons Learned from International space station crew autonomous scheduling test: International Workshop of Planning and Scheduling for Space (IWPSS).

27.

Marquez

J. J.

Hillenius

Kanefsky

Zheng

Deliz

Reagan

(2017). Increasing crew autonomy for long duration exploration missions: Self-scheduling [Paper presentation]. 2017 IEEE Aerospace Conference (pp. 1–10), Big Sky, MT, IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/AERO.2017.7943838

28.

Marquez

J. J.

Hillenius

Zheng

Deliz

Kanefsky

Gale

(2019b). Designing for astronaut-centric planning and scheduling aids. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 63(1), 468–469. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181319631386

29.

Marquez

J. J.

Pyrzak

Hashemi

McMillin

Medwid

(2013). Supporting real-time operations and execution through timeline and scheduling aids [Paper presentation]. 43rd International conference on environmental systems (Vol. 1). American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2013-3519

30.

Mishra

A. P.

Sengupta

Sreedharan

Chakraborti

Kambhampati

(2019). Cap: A decision support system for crew scheduling using automated planning. Naturalistic Decision Making.

31.

Roma

P. G.

Hursh

S. R.

Hienz

R. D.

Emurian

H. H.

Gasior

E. D.

Brinson

Z. S.

Brady

J. V.

(2011). Behavioral and biological effects of autonomous versus scheduled mission management in simulated space-dwelling groups. Acta Astronautica, 68(9–10), 1581–1588. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actaastro.2009.09.034

32.

Russell

Hawkins

Arnold

K. A.

(2012). Guidelines for successful self-scheduling on nursing units. JONA: The Journal of Nursing Administration, 42(9), 408–409. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNA.0b013e3182664dd8

33.

Smit

A. S.

Eling

P. A. T. M.

Coenen

A. M. L.

(2004). Mental effort affects vigilance enduringly: After-effects in EEG and behavior. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 53(3), 239–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2004.04.005

34.

Zhu

Fan

Yang

Pei

Pardalos

P. M.

(2019). Operating room planning and surgical case scheduling: A review of literature. Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, 37(3), 757–805. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10878-018-0322-6

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.13 MB