Flight simulation is a proven technique for training technical and procedural skills, but team skills present needs that remain unmet by simulator technology. Communication and coordination, two skills representative of this gap, are typically incorporated into simulation via human role players, a practice that entails cost, introduces variation, and can compromise availability of training. In this article we explore the use of speech-interactive synthetic teammates to bring team skills into simulation-based training. We report on a US Air Force study that led to the development of a desktop air traffic pattern simulation for practicing radio communications, and present findings from a study conducted with US Air Force student pilots who employed this system during part of their pilot training. The work reported here addresses two questions. First, can contemporary desktop simulation augmented with intelligent agents and voice recognition provide training gains in communications performance among student pilots? Second, will users accept this approach?
Chatham RE, Braddock J.Report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Training Superiority and Training Surprise. Washington, DC: Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, and Logistics , 2001; p. 5.
2.
Beringer DBIssues in using off-the-shelf PC-based flight simulation for research and training: Historical perspective, current solutions, and emerging technologies . In: Proceedings of the 38th Annual Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1994; pp. 90-4.
3.
Jentsch F., Bowers CAEvidence for the validity of pc-based simulations in studying aircrew coordination . Int J Aviation Psychol1998; 8: 243-60.
4.
Rogers BKMicrocomputer-based Instrument Flight Simulation: Undergraduate Pilot Training Student Attitude Assessment. Technical Report No. AL-TR-1991-0039, Williams Air Force Base, Chandler, AZ.
5.
Baker D., Prince C., Shrestha L., Oser R., Salas E.Aviation computer games for crew resource management training. Int J Aviation Psychol1993; 3: 143-56.
6.
Dewey J.Experience and Education. New York: Macmillan, 1938.
7.
Duffy TM, Jonassen DHConstructivism: new implications for instructional technology. In: Duffy TM, Jonassen DH (eds.), Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1992; pp. 1-15.
8.
Bednar AK, Cunningham D., Duffy TM, Perry JD. Theory into practice: how do we link? In: Duffy TM, Jonassen DH (eds.), Constructivism and the Technology of Instruction: A Conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1992; pp. 18-33.
9.
Lave J., Wenger E.Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press, 1991.
10.
Gott SPApprenticeship instruction for real-world tasks: the coordination of procedures, mental models, and strategies. In: Rothkopf EZ (ed.), Review of Research in Education, Vol. 15. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association , 1989; pp. 97-169.
11.
Collins A., Brown JS, Newman S.Cognitive apprenticeship: teaching the crafts of reading, writing, and mathematics . In: Resnick LB (ed.), Knowing, Learning, and Instruction: Essays in Honor of Robert Glaser. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1989; pp. 453-94.
12.
Schank RC, Fano A., Bell BL, Jona MK ( 1994). The design of goal based scenarios. J Learn Sci1994; 3: 305-45.
13.
Salas E., Priest HA, Wilson KA, Burke CSScenario-based training: Improving military mission performance and adaptability . In: Adler AB, Castro CA, Britt TW (eds.), Military life: The psychology of serving in peace and combat. Vol. 2, Operational Stress. Westport, CT, 2006; pp. 32-53.
14.
Fowlkes JE, Dwyer D., Oser RL, Salas E.Event-Based Approach to Training (EBAT). Int J Aviation Psychol1998; 8: 209-21.
15.
Oser RL, Dwyer DJ, Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E.Enhancing multi-crew information warfare performance-an event-based approach for training. In: Proceedings of the 1st Symposium of the Human Factors and Medicine Panel of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization , Edinburgh, United Kingdom, 1998.
16.
Means B., Salas E., Crandall B., Jacobs TOTraining decision makers for the real world. In: Klein G, Orasanu J, Calderwood R, Zsambok CE (eds.), Decision Making in Action: Models and Methods. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1993; pp. 306-26.
17.
Ericsson KA , Krampe RTh , Tesch-Römer C.The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychol Rev1993; 100: 363-406.
18.
Zachary WW, Ryder JM, Hicinbothom JHCognitive task analysis and modeling of decision making in complex environments . In: Cannon-Bowers J, Salas E (eds.), Decision Making Under Stress: Implications for Training and Simulation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 1998; pp. 315-44.
19.
Carbonell JRAI in CAI: an artificial-intelligence approach to computer-assisted instruction. IEEE Trans Man-Machine Syst1970; 11: 190-202.
20.
Burton RR, Brown JSA tutoring and student modelling paradigm for gaming environments. SIGCUE Outlook1976; 10: 236-46.
21.
Goldstein IP, Carr B.The computer as coach: an athletic paradigm for intellectual education. In: ACM ‘77: Proceedings of the 1977 Annual Conference , 1977; pp. 227-33.
22.
Johnson WL, Rickel JW, Lester JCAnimated pedagogical agents: face-to-face interaction in interactive learning environments. Int J Artificial Intell Educ2000; 11: 47-78.
23.
Rickel J., Johnson WLAnimated agents for procedural training in virtual reality: perception, cognition, and motor control. Applied Artificial Intelligence1999; 13: 343-82.
24.
Laird JE, Newell A., Rosenbloom PSSOAR: an architecture for general intelligence. Artificial Intell1987; 33: 1-64.
25.
Anderson JRACT: a simple theory of complex cognition. Am Psychologist1996; 51: 355-65.
26.
Lewis MW, Milson R., Anderson JRThe teacher’s apprentice: Designing an intelligent authoring system for high school mathematics. In: Kearsley GP (ed.), Artificial Intelligence and Instruction. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1987 .
27.
Gluck KA, Lovett MC, Anderson JRThe adaptive nature of learning from Stat Lady. In: Proceedings of the 19th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society . Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 1997; p. 931.
28.
Coulter K., Jones R., Kenny P., Koss F., Laird J., Nielsen P.Automated intelligent pilots for combat flight simulation. In: Proceedings of the 10th Annual Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press, 1999; pp. 1047-54.
29.
Nielsen PESOAR/IFOR: intelligent agents for air simulation and control. In: Proceedings of the 27th Conference on Winter Simulation (Arlington, VA, December 1995). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society, 1995; pp. 620-25.
30.
Best BJ, Lebiere C.Cognitive agents interacting in real and virtual worlds. In Sun R (ed.), Cognition and Multi-agent Interaction: From Cognitive Modeling to Social Simulation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2006; pp. 186-218.
31.
Heuvelink A., Both F.BOA: a cognitive tactical picture compilation agent. In: Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE/WIC/ACM international Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology (November, 2007). Washington, DC: IEEE Computer Society, 2007; pp. 175-81.
32.
Glenn F.Military applications of cognitive models with COGNET. In: Proceedings of Second European Conference on Cognitive Modeling . Nottingham, UK: Nottingham University Press, 1998; pp. 173-4.
33.
Zachary W., Cannon-Bowers J., Bilazarian P., Krecker D., Lardieri P., Burns J.An intelligent embedded tutoring system for tactical team training: the Advanced Embedded Training System (AETS). Int J Artificial Intell Educ1999; 10: 257-77.
34.
Weiland W., Szczepkowski M., Urban G., Mitchell T., Lyons D., Soles R.Reusing cognitive models: leveraging SCOTT technology in an LCAC virtual training environment. In; Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Computer-Generated Forces and Behavior Representation. Orlando, FL: UCF Institute for Simulation & Training , 2002; pp. 315-22.
35.
Zachary W., Ryder J., Stokes J., Glenn F., Le Mentec J-C., Santarelli T.A COGNET/iGEN cognitive model that mimics human performance and learning in a simulated work environment. In: Gluck K, Pew R (eds.), Modeling Human Behavior with Integrated Cognitive Architectures: Comparison, Evaluation, and Validation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 2005.
36.
Zachary W., Santarelli T., Lyons D., Bergondy M., Johnston J.Using a community of intelligent synthetic entities to support operational team training. In: Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation. Orlando, FL: Institute for Simulation and Training , 2001; pp. 215-24.
37.
Taylor G., Miller J., Maddox J.Automating simulation-based air traffic control. In: Proceedings of the Interservice/ Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ ITSEC), 2005.
38.
Gluck KA, Ball JT, Gunzelmann G., Krusmark MA, Lyon DR, Cooke NJA prospective look at a synthetic teammate for UAV applications. In: Proceedings of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Infotech@Aerospace Conference. Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2005 .
39.
Roberts B.COVE-a shiphandling trainer with an attitude. Paper presented at the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation and Education Conference, 2001.
40.
Bell B., Johnston J., Freeman J., Rody F.STRATA: DARWARS for deployable, on-demand aircrew training. In: Proceedings of the Interservice/Industry Training, Simulation, and Education Conference (I/ITSEC), December 2004.
41.
Ball J.A computational psycholinguistic model of natural language understanding. Proceedings of the Natural Language Understanding and Cognitive Science Workshop. Portugal: INSTICC Press, 2004; pp. 3-14.
42.
Afrl.Advanced Training Technology Needs for AETC Flying Training. Final Report ETTAP Project 02-19, Air Force Research Laboratory, Mesa, AZ, 2002.
43.
Aetc.T-6 Primary Flying. Report AFMAN 11-248, Air Education and Training Command , 31 August 2004.
44.
Aetc.Runway Supervisory Unit (RSU) Operations . Report AFI 11-204, Air Education and Training Command, 23 January 2006.
45.
Aetc.T-6 Aircrew Training. Report AFI 11-2T-6, v1, Air Education and Training Command , 1 May 2002.
46.
Aetc.T-6 Operations Procedures. Report AFI 11-2T-6, v3, Air Education and Training Command , 19 April 2006.
47.
Zachary W., Le Mentec J., Ryder J.Interface agents in complex systems. In: Ntuen C, Park E (eds.), Human Interaction with Complex Systems: Conceptual Principles and Design Practice . Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers , 1996; pp. 35-52.
48.
Brannick MT, Salas E, Prince C (eds.). Team Performance Assessment and Measurement: Theory, Methods and Applications . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1997.
49.
Cannon-Bowers JA, Salas E.Teamwork competencies: The intersection of team member knowledge, skills, and attitudes. In: O’Neil HF (Ed.), Workforce Readiness: Competencies and Assessment. Mahwah, NJ: LEA , 1997; pp. 151-174.
50.
Swezey RW, Salas E (eds.). Teams: Their Training and Performance. Norwood, NJ: Ablex, 1992.
51.
Johnston JH, Smith-Jentsch KA, Cannon-Bowers JAPerformance measurement tools for enhancing team decision-making. In: Brannick MT, Salas E, Prince C (eds), Team Performance Assessment and Measurement: Theory, Methods and Applications. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1997.
52.
Fowlkes J., Burke CSEvent-Based Approach to Training (EBAT). In: Stanton N, Hedge A, Brookhuis K, Salas E , Hendrick H (eds.), Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics Methods. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2005; pp. 47-1-47-5.
