The majority of the literature on situation awareness is focused on its perceptual definition and modeling. In contrast, this presentation focuses on the importance of training simulation systems in increasing the potential for good situation awareness. Situation awareness is defined as an evaluative product based on expert performance criteria. A conventional information processing model is used to represent situation awareness as a generalized concept and modified for specific applications. Three salient factors affecting quality situation awareness are discussed: 1) high fidelity procedural training, 2) expert knowledge and experience, and 3) the strong indeterminates of attitude and emotional state. Additional issues are discussed, including: a developmental verses a gestalt framework for the perceptual process; information processing capacities; automaticity skills; traditional verses transactional training; the novice/expert relationship; expert and novice decision making; training device fidelity and ethnographic concerns; the dimension of unpredictability; inherent psychological abilities; and workload.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
EndsleyM. R., Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique (SAGAT), Proceedings of the National Aerospace and Electronics Conference, IEEE, New York, pp. 789–795, 1988.
2.
GilsonR. D., Special Issue Preface, Human Factors, 37: 1, pp. 3–4, 1995.
3.
KilduffP., Richthofen: Beyond the Legend of the Red Baron, Wiley and Sons, New York, 1993.
4.
SpickM., The Ace Factor: Air Combat and the Role of Situational Awareness, Naval Institute Press, Annapolis, Maryland, 1988.
5.
SarterN. B. and WoodD. D., Situation Awareness: A Critical but Ill-Defined Phenomenon, The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 1: 1, pp. 45–57, 1991.
6.
AdamsM. J.TenneyY. J., and PewR. W., Situation Awareness and the Cognitive Management of Complex Systems, Human Factors, 37: 1, pp. 85–104, 1995.
7.
EndsleyM. R., Toward a Theory of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems, Human Factors, 37: 1, pp. 32–64, 1995.
8.
SmithK. and HancockP. A., Situation Awareness is Adaptive, Externally Directed Consciousness, Human Factors, 37: 1, pp. 137–148, 1995.
9.
FlachJ. M., Situation Awareness: Proceed with Caution, Human Factors, 37: 1, pp. 149–157, 1995.
10.
RegalD. M.RogersW. H., and BoucekG. P., Situation Awareness in the Commercial Flight Deck: Definition, Measurement, and Enhancement, Proceedings of the Seventh Aerospace Behavioral Technology Conference, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, Pennsylvania, 1988.
11.
EndsleyM. R., Situation Awareness: Some Reflections and Comments, in Situation Awareness in Complex Systems, GilsonR. D.GarlandD. J., and KoonceJ. M. (eds.), Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Press, Daytona Beach, Florida, 1994.
12.
HitchcockL., Yours, Mine, and Ours: Some Observations on the Metaphysics of Situation Awareness, in Situation Awareness in Complex Systems, GilsonR.GarlandD., and KoonceJ. (eds.), Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Press, Orlando, Florida, 1995.
13.
KvaleS., Interviews: An Introduction to Qualitative Research Interviewing, Sage, Thousand Oaks, California, 1996.
14.
MunroA.FehlingM. R., and TawneD. M., Instructional Intrusiveness in Dynamic Simulation Training, Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 12: 2, pp. 50–53, 1985.
15.
PewR. A., An Introduction to the Concept of Situation Awareness, in Situation Awareness in Complex Systems, GilsonR. D.GarlandD. J., and KoonceJ. M. (eds.), Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Press, Daytona Beach, Florida, 1995.
16.
BillingsC. E., Situation Awareness in Complex Systems: A Commentary, in Situation Awareness in Complex Systems, GilsonR. D.GarlandD. J., and KoonceJ. M. (eds.), Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University Press, Daytona Beach, Florida, 1994.
17.
NeisserU., Cognition and Reality: Principles and Implications of Cognitive Psychology, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco, 1976.
18.
SanfordA. J. and GarrodS. C., Understanding Written Language, Wiley and Sons, New York, 1981.
19.
MayerR. E., Models for Understanding, Review of Educational Research, 59: 1, pp. 43–64, 1989.
20.
GreenoJ. G., The Expert Module and Student Modeling, in Proceedings of the Air Force Form for Intelligent Tutoring Systems, RichardsonJ. and PolsonM. (eds.), Air Force Human Resource Laboratory, Brooks AFB, Texas, 1989.
21.
KuhnT. S., The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 1962.
22.
PalmerS. E., Hierarchical Structure in Perceptual Representation, Cognitive Psychology, 9, pp. 441–471, 1977.
23.
DeMayM., The Cognitive Paradigm, Reidel, Dordrecht, Holland, 1982.
24.
NormanD. A., Memory and Attention: An Introduction to Human Information Processing, Wiley, New York, 1976.
25.
ReifF., Theoretical and Educational Concerns with Problem Solving: Bridging the Gaps with Human Cognitive Engineering, in Problem Solving and Education, TumaD. and ReifF. (eds.), Halsted, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 39–50, 1980.
26.
SimonH. A., The Sciences of the Artificial, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1969.
27.
SimonH. A., Problem Solving and Education, in Problem Solving and Education, TumaD. and ReifF. (eds.), Halsted, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 81–96, 1980.
28.
NewellA. and SimonH. A., Human Problem Solving, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1972.
29.
PaskG., The Cybernetics of Human Learning and Performance, Hutchinson Educational, London, 1975.
30.
AtkinsonR. C. and ShiffrinR. M., Human Memory: A Proposed System and It's Control Process (Technical Report 110), Stanford University, Palo Alto, California, 1967.
31.
GreenoJ. G., Trends in the Theory of Knowledge and Problem Solving, in Problem Solving and Education, TumaD. and ReifF. (eds.), Halsted, Hillsdale, New Jersey, pp. 9–23, 1980.
32.
PiagetJ., Judgment and Reasoning in the Child, Harcourt, Brace, and Jovanovich, New York, 1928.
33.
BartlettF. C., Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1932.
34.
MinskyM., A Framework for Representing Knowledge, in The Psychology of Computer Vision, WinstonP. (ed.), McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 211–277, 1975.
35.
CherryE. C., Some Experiments in the Recognition of Speech with One and Two Ears, Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, 25, pp. 975–979, 1953.
36.
BroadbentD. E., Perception and Communication, Pergamon Press, London, 1958.
37.
MorayN., Attention in Dichotic Listening: Affective Cues and the Influence of Instruction, Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 9, pp. 56–60, 1959.
38.
DeutchJ. A. and DeutchD., Attention: Some Theoretical Considerations, Psychological Review, 70: 1, pp. 80–90, 1963.
39.
GarnerW. R., Uncertainty and Structure as a Psychological Concept, Wiley, New York, 1962.
40.
FrickF. C., Some Perceptual Problems from the Point of View of Information Theory, in Current Trends in Information Theory, McMillianN. S. (eds.), University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1953.
41.
MillerG. A., The Magic Number Seven, Plus or Minus Two: Some Limits on Our Capacity for Processing Information, Psychology Review, 63: 2, pp. 81–97, 1956.
42.
StolurowL. M., A Model and Cybernetic System for Research on the Teaching-Learning Process, Programmed Learning (British Journal of the Association of Programmed Learning)2: 3, pp. 138–157, 1965.
43.
MyersG. L. and FiskA. D., Training Consistent Task Components: Application of Automatic and Controlled Processing Theory to Industrial Task Training, Human Factors, 29, pp. 255–268, 1987.
44.
FiskA. D.HodgeK. A.LeeM. D., and RogersN. A., Automatic Information Processing and High Performance Skills: Acquisition, Transfer, and Retention (AFHRL-TR89–69), Air Force Human Resources Laboratory, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, 1990.
45.
StolurowL. M., Learning Environments-or-Rooms for Thought, in How Teachers Make a Difference, GageN. (ed.), United States Office of Education, Washington, D.C., 1971.
46.
LandaL. H., Cybernetics Methods in Education, Educational Technology, 17: 10, pp. 7–13. 1977.
47.
LandaL. H., Instructional Regulation and Control: Cybernetics, Algorithization, and Heuristics in Education, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, 1976.
48.
GillertD., F-16 Simulator Being Developed for Reserve, Air Force Times, November 2, 1992.
49.
GersonC. W., The Selective Task Trainer: The Expert Solution, Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 23: 3, pp. 201–217, 1995.
50.
ShriffrinR. A. and SchneiderW., Controlled and Automatic Human Information Processing: II. Perceptual Learning, Automatic Attending and a General Theory, Psychological Review, 84, pp. 127–190, 1977.
51.
FedericoP. A., Expert and Novice Recognition of Similar Situations, Human Factors, 37: 1, pp. 105–122, 1995.
52.
GlaserR., Thoughts on Expertise (LRDC TR-8), University of Pittsburgh, Learning Research and Development Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1985.
53.
EinhomH. J. and HogarthR. M., Behavioral Decision Theory: Processes of Judgment and Choice, in Decision Making: An Interdisciplinary Inquiry, UngsonG. and BraunsteinD. (eds.), Kent, Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 15–41, 1982.
54.
WeickK. E., Rethinking Research on Decision Making, in Decision Making: An Interdisciplinary Inquiry, UngsonG. and BraunsteinD. (eds.), Kent Publishing Co., Boston, Massachusetts, pp. 15–41, 1982.
55.
RichardsonJ. J., Directions for Research and Applications, RichardsonJ. and PolsonM. (eds.), Proceedings of the Air Force Forum for Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Air Force Human Resources Laboratory, Brooks AFB, Texas, 1989.
56.
AlessiS. M., Fidelity in the Design of Instructional Simulations, Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 15: 2, pp. 40–47, 1988.
57.
ThurmanR. A., Instructional Simulation: From a Cognitive Psychology Viewpoint, Educational Technology Research and Development, 41: 4, pp. 75–89, 1993.
58.
MillerR. B., Psychological Considerations in the Design of Training Equipment (WD Technical Report 54–563), Wright Air Development Center, Aero Medical Laboratory, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio, 1954.
59.
HaysR. T., A Fidelity Definition and Outline of Interactive Factors, U.S. Army Research Institute for Behavioral and Social Sciences, The ARI Fidelity Workshop, Alexandria, Virginia, 1980.
60.
FredaJ. S. and OzkaptanH., An Approach to Fidelity in Training Simulation, Research Note 83–3, U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, Alexandria, Virginia, 1980.
61.
SuY. D., A Review of the Literature on Training Simulations: Transfer of Training and Simulator Fidelity, Center for Man-Machine Systems Research, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia, 1984.
62.
ReigeluthC. M. and SchwartzE., An Instructional Theory for the Design of Computer-Based Simulations, Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 16: 1, pp. 1–10, 1989.
63.
BoloviciJ. A., Measuring Transfer in Military Settings, in Transfer of Learning, CormierS. and HagmanJ. (eds.), Academic Press, New York, 1987.
64.
BeyerchenA., Clausewitz, Nonlinearity, and the Unpredictability of War, International Security, 17: 3, pp. 59–90, 1992.
65.
BrunerJ., Some Theorems on Instruction Illustrated with Reference to Mathematics, in Theories of Learning and Instruction, HilgardE. R. (ed.), University Press, Chicago, Illinois, 1964.
66.
EndsleyM. R., Pilot Situation Awareness: The Challenge for the Training Community, Proceedings of the 12th Interservice/Industry Training Systems Conference, Fort Worth, Texas, 1989.
67.
PellegrinoJ. W., Individual Differences in Skill Acquisition: Information Processing Efficiency in the Development of Automaticity (AFHRL-TP-87-52), Air Force Human Resource Laboratory, Brooks AFB, Texas, 1988.
68.
BrunerJ., Models of the Learner, Educational Researcher, 14, pp. 5–8, 1985.
