Time pressure has been found to reduce the quality of decision making by restricting consideration of information and options and by inducing strategy shifts. Time pressure is usually considered an external variable manipulated by the experimenter. In this paper we distinguish between externally-induced time pressures and crew-generated time pressures, and examine how crews can mitigate or exacerbate external pressures. The roles of both types of time pressures in crew decision making are examined in three air transport accidents and in crew performance in full-mission simulated flight. Implications for crew training are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ChidesterT. R.KankiB. G.FousheeH. C.DickinsonC. L.BowlesS. V. (1990). Personality factors in flight operations: Volume I. Leadership characteristics and crew performance in a full-mission air transport simulation. (NASA Tech. Mem. No. 102259). Moffett Field, CA: NASA-Ames Research Center.
2.
FischerU.OrasanuJ.MontalvoM. L. (1993). Effective decision strategies on the flight deck. In JensenR. (Ed.). Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Aviation Psychology.Columbus, OH: Ohio State University (238–243).
3.
FousheeH. C.LauberJ. K.BaetgeM. M.AcombD. B. (1986). Crew factors in flight operations: III, The operational significance of exposure to short-haul air transport operations. (Tech. Mem. No. 88322). Moffett Field, CA: NASA-Ames Research Center.
4.
KleinG. A. (1993). A recognition-primed decision (RPD) model of rapid decision making. In KleinG.OrasanuJ.CalderwoodR.ZsambokC. (Eds.). Decision making in action: Models and methods.Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
5.
National Transportation Safety Board. (1987). Aircraft Accident Report: Piedmont Airlines Flight 267, Boeing 737-222, N752N, Charlotte Douglas International Airport, Charlotte, North Carolina, October 26, 1986. (NTSB/AAR-87/08). Washington, DC: Author.
6.
National Transportation Safety Board (1991). Aircraft Accident Report: Avianca, The Airline of Columbia, Boeing 707–321B, HK2016, Fuel Exhaustion, Cove Neck, New York, January 25, 1990. (NTSB/AAR-91/04). Washington, DC: Author.
7.
National Transportation Safety Board. (1993). Aircraft Accident Report: Aborted Takeoff Shortly After Liftoff, Trans World Airlines Flight 843, Lockheed L-1011, N11002, John F. Kennedy International Airport, July 30, 1992. (NTSB/AAR-93/04). Washington, DC: Author.
8.
National Transportation Safety Board (1994). Safety Study: A Review of Flightcrew-involved, Major Accidents of U.S. Air Carriers, 1978 through 1990, (NTSB/SS-94/01). Washington, DC: Author.
9.
OrasanuJ. (1993). Decision-making in the cockpit. In WienerE.L.KankiB.G.HelmreichR.L., (Eds.) Cockpit Resource Management.San Diego, Academic Press.
10.
PayneJ. W.BettmanJ. R.JohnsonE. J. (1993). The adaptive decision maker.New York: Cambridge University Press.
11.
StokesA.BelgerA.ZhangK. (1990). Investigation of factors comprising a model of pilot decision making: Part II, Anxiety and cognitive strategies in expert and novice aviators. Final Technical Report, ARL-90-8/SCEEE-90-2. Institute of Aviation, University of Illinois.
12.
StokesA. F.KemperK L.MarshR. (1992). Time-stressed flight decision making; A study of expert and novice aviators. Technical Report ARL-93-1/INEL-93-1, Institute of Aviation, University of Illinois.
13.
SvensonO.EdlandA. (1987). Changes of preferences under time pressure: Choices and judgments. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 28, 322–330.
14.
ThordsenM. L.KleinG. A. (1991). Training implications of a team decision model. In JensenR. S. (Ed.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology.Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University (296–301).
15.
WickensC. D.StokesA.BarnettB.HymanF. (1991). The effects of stress on pilot judgment in a MIDIS simulator. In SvensonO.MauleJ. (Eds.), Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making.Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
16.
WrightP. L. (1974). The harassed decision maker: Time pressures, disiractions, and the use of evidence. Journal of Applied Psychology, 59, 555–561.
