This paper presents the results of a series of task analyses with decision makers responsible for managing public health crises. The goal was to uncover cognitive requirements for achieving option awareness, in addition to situation awareness, in complex and emergent decision-making scenarios. Five expert decision makers in multiple roles related to public health were interviewed to elicit knowledge requirements relating to emerging public health crises. Analysis revealed patterns of responses showing that in addition to the known necessity of high situation awareness in handling complex events, additional forms of awareness about the relative desirability of options affect the decision making of experts. The results have implications for the design of systems supporting decision making under high complexity and uncertainty, as well as for training to accelerate the growth of novices into expert decision makers.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BennerP.KyriakidisP. H.StannardD. (2011). Clinical wisdom and interventions in acute and critical care: A thinking-in-action approach. New York: Springer.
2.
ChandrasekaranB.GoldmanM. (2007). Exploring robustness of plans for simulation-based course of action planning: A framework and an example. IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence in Multicriteria Decision Making (pp. 185-192). Honolulu, HI.
3.
DauseyD.AledortJ.LurieN. (2006). Tabletop exercises for pandemic influenza preparedness in local public health agencies. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. Retrieved from http://www.rand.org/publications/TR/TR319/.
4.
DruryJ. L.KleinG. L.MathieuJ.LiuY.PfaffM. S. (2013). Sympathetic decisions: Incorporating impacts on others into emergency response decision spaces. Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM). Baden-Baden, Germany.
5.
DruryJ. L.PfaffM. S.KleinG. L.EntezariS. O. (2012).Establishing collaborative option awareness during crisis management. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM). Vancouver, Canada.
6.
DruryJ. L.PfaffM. S.KleinG. L.LiuY. (2013). Decision space visualization: Lessons learned and design principles. In KurosuM. (Ed.), Proceedings of the 15th HCI International 2013, Part IV (Vol. 8007, pp. 658-667). Berlin: Springer.
7.
EndsleyM. R. (1993). A Survey of Situation Awareness Requirements in Air-to-Air Combat Fighters. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3(2), 157-168. doi: 10.1207/s15327108ijap0302_5
8.
EndsleyM. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37(1), 32-64.
9.
HallD. L.HellarB.McNeeseM. D. (2007). Rethinking the data overload problem: Closing the gap between situation assessment and decision making. Paper presented at the 2007 Symposium on Sensor and Data Fusion (NSSDF) Military Sensing Symposia (MSS), McLean, VA.
10.
HoffmanR. R.MilitelloL. G. (2009). Perspectives on cognitive task analysis: Historical origins and modern communities of practice. New York: Psychology Press.
11.
KleinG. A. (1998). Sources of power: How people make decisions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12.
KleinG. L.DruryJ. L.PfaffM. S. (2011). Providing an option awareness basis for naturalistic decision making. Cognitive Technology, 16(2), 10-19.
13.
LempertR. J.PopperS. W.BankesS. C. (2003). Shaping the next one hundred years: New methods for quantitative, long- term policy analysis. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
14.
LiuY.MoonS. P.PfaffM. S.DruryJ. L.KleinG. L. (2011). Collaborative option awareness for emergency response decision making. Proceedings of the 8th International Converence on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Managment (ISCRAM). Lisbon, Portugal.
15.
MathieuJ.PfaffM. S.DruryJ. L.KleinG. L. (2010). Tactical robust decision making methodology: Effect of disease spread model fidelity on option awareness. 7th International Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM 2010). Seattle, WA.
16.
MilitelloL. G.HuttonR. J. B. (1998). Applied cognitive task analysis (ACTA): A practitioner’s toolkit for understanding cognitive task demands. Ergonomics, 41(11), 1618-1641. doi: 10.1080/001401398186108
17.
MorrisonJ. G.KellyR. T.MooreR. A.HutchinsS. G. (1998). Implications of decision-making research for decision support and displays. In Cannon-BowersJ. A.SalasE. (Eds.), Making decisions under stress (pp. 375-406). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
18.
MosierK. L. (1997). Technology and “naturalistic” decision making: Myths and realities. In ZsambokC. E.KleinG. A. (Eds.), Naturalistic decision making (pp. 41-54). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
19.
PfaffM. S.KleinG. L.DruryJ. L.MoonS. P.LiuY.EntezariS. O. (2013). Supporting complex decision making through option awareness. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 7(2), 155-178. doi: 10.1177/1555343412455799
20.
ShneidermanB.PlaisantC.HesseB. W. (2013). Improving healthcare with interactive visualization. Computer, 46(5), 58-66. doi: 10.1109/MC.2013.38
21.
StaskoJ.GörgC.LiuZ. (2008). Jigsaw: Supporting investigative analysis through interactive visualization. Information Visualization, 7(2), 118-132. doi: 10.1057/palgrave.ivs.9500180
22.
WickensC. D. (2015). Situation awareness: Its applications value and its fuzzy dichotomies. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 9(1), 90–94. doi:10.1177/1555343414564571
