Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The role of situation awareness (SA) in aircrew safety and survivability continues to be of considerable interest to the aviation community. Various methods of measuring SA have been proposed. Among these are SAGAT and SA-SWORD. The former is an objective measure of SA, while the latter is based on operators' subjective comparisons. This paper reports the findings of a study that compared these two metrics in a simulated low-level ingress scenario. It was found that the type of SA metric used did not affect performance measures collected. While independent variables manipulated had large and statistically significant effects upon SA-SWORD data, this was not true for SAGAT data and the two SA measures were not significantly correlated. Advantages and disadvantages of the two techniques are discussed, and lessons learned from their application in this study are reported.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Boag

C. C.

Neale

Neal

(1999). Measuring situation awareness: A comparison of four measurement tools. In 10th International Aviation Psychology Symposium (pp. in press). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.

Endsley

M. R.

(1995a). Measurement of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37(1), 65–84.

Endsley

M. R.

(1995b). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37(1), 32–64.

Endsley

M. R.

Selcon

S. J.

Hardiman

T. D.

Croft

D. G.

(1998). A comparative analysis of SAGAT and SART for evaluations of situation awareness. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42d Annual Meeting (pp. 82–86). Santa Monica, CA: HFES.

Moroze

M. L.

Snow

M. P.

(1999). Causes and remedies of controlled flight into terrain (CFIT) in military and civil aviation. In 10th International Aviation Psychology Symposium (pp. in press). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.

Snow

M. P.

Reising

J. M.

(1999). Effect of pathway-in-the-sky and synthetic terrain imagery on situation awareness in a simulated low-level ingress scenario. In 4th Annual Symposium on Situation Awareness in the Tactical Air Environment (pp. 198–207). Patuxent River, MD: NAWCAD.

Snow

M. P.

Reising

J. M.

Liggett

K. K.

Barry

T. P.

(1999). Flying complex approaches using a head-up display: effects of visibility and display type. In 10th International Aviation Psychology Symposium (pp. in press). Columbus, OH: Ohio State University.

Taylor

R. M.

(1990). Situational awareness rating technique (SART): The development of a tool for aircrew systems design. In Situational Awareness in Aerospace Operations (AGARD-CP-478) (pp. 3/1–3/17). Neuilly Sur Seine, France: AGARD.

Vidulich

M. A.

Hughes

E. R.

(1991). Testing a subjective metric of situation awareness. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting (pp. 1307–1311). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.

10.

Wiener

E. L.

(1977). Controlled flight into terrain: System-induced accidents. Human Factors, 19(2), 171–181.

Comparison of Two Situation Awareness Metrics: SAGAT and SA-SWORD

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References