The evaluation of the decision making processes employed by cadet pilots following a short aeronautical decision-making training program

Wen Chin Li, Don Harris

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Many aeronautical decision-making (ADM) mnemonic-based methods exist. However, there is no empirical research that suggests that they are actually effective in improving decision-making. Klein (1993), in his study of naturalistic decision making, suggested that the decision-making process centers around two processes: situation assessment to generate a plausible course of action and mental simulation to evaluate that course of action for risk management. In this study a short, ADM training course was constructed around two mnemonic methods, SHOR (Stimuli, Hypotheses, Options, and Response) and DESIDE (Detect, Estimate, Set safety objectives, Identify, Do, Evaluate). Forty-one pilots from the Republic of China Tactical Training Wing participated: half received a short ADM training course and half did not. After training, the procedural knowledge underpinning their Situation Assessment and Risk Management ability, two skills essential for successful decision-making, were evaluated using pencil and paper-based knowledge tests based upon several demanding tactical flight situations. These scenarios were designed to encompass the six basic types of decision making described by Orasanu (1993); go/no go decisions; recognition-primed decisions; response selection decisions; resource management decisions; non-diagnostic procedural decisions, and decisions requiring creative problem-solving. The results show gains attributable to the decision making training course in both situation assessment and risk management skills. The results strongly suggest that ADM is trainable and such a training course is effective in improving the bases of in-flight decision-making.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)315-333
Number of pages19
JournalInternational Journal of Applied Aviation Studies
Volume6
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - Sep 2006
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Decision making
Risk management

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Aerospace Engineering

Cite this

@article{e2044bfc40a643ddb9a6c81d8035f462,
title = "The evaluation of the decision making processes employed by cadet pilots following a short aeronautical decision-making training program",
abstract = "Many aeronautical decision-making (ADM) mnemonic-based methods exist. However, there is no empirical research that suggests that they are actually effective in improving decision-making. Klein (1993), in his study of naturalistic decision making, suggested that the decision-making process centers around two processes: situation assessment to generate a plausible course of action and mental simulation to evaluate that course of action for risk management. In this study a short, ADM training course was constructed around two mnemonic methods, SHOR (Stimuli, Hypotheses, Options, and Response) and DESIDE (Detect, Estimate, Set safety objectives, Identify, Do, Evaluate). Forty-one pilots from the Republic of China Tactical Training Wing participated: half received a short ADM training course and half did not. After training, the procedural knowledge underpinning their Situation Assessment and Risk Management ability, two skills essential for successful decision-making, were evaluated using pencil and paper-based knowledge tests based upon several demanding tactical flight situations. These scenarios were designed to encompass the six basic types of decision making described by Orasanu (1993); go/no go decisions; recognition-primed decisions; response selection decisions; resource management decisions; non-diagnostic procedural decisions, and decisions requiring creative problem-solving. The results show gains attributable to the decision making training course in both situation assessment and risk management skills. The results strongly suggest that ADM is trainable and such a training course is effective in improving the bases of in-flight decision-making.",
author = "Li, {Wen Chin} and Don Harris",
year = "2006",
month = "9",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
pages = "315--333",
journal = "International Journal of Applied Aviation Studies",
issn = "1546-3214",
publisher = "Federal Aviation Administration Academy (U>S)",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The evaluation of the decision making processes employed by cadet pilots following a short aeronautical decision-making training program

AU - Li, Wen Chin

AU - Harris, Don

PY - 2006/9

Y1 - 2006/9

N2 - Many aeronautical decision-making (ADM) mnemonic-based methods exist. However, there is no empirical research that suggests that they are actually effective in improving decision-making. Klein (1993), in his study of naturalistic decision making, suggested that the decision-making process centers around two processes: situation assessment to generate a plausible course of action and mental simulation to evaluate that course of action for risk management. In this study a short, ADM training course was constructed around two mnemonic methods, SHOR (Stimuli, Hypotheses, Options, and Response) and DESIDE (Detect, Estimate, Set safety objectives, Identify, Do, Evaluate). Forty-one pilots from the Republic of China Tactical Training Wing participated: half received a short ADM training course and half did not. After training, the procedural knowledge underpinning their Situation Assessment and Risk Management ability, two skills essential for successful decision-making, were evaluated using pencil and paper-based knowledge tests based upon several demanding tactical flight situations. These scenarios were designed to encompass the six basic types of decision making described by Orasanu (1993); go/no go decisions; recognition-primed decisions; response selection decisions; resource management decisions; non-diagnostic procedural decisions, and decisions requiring creative problem-solving. The results show gains attributable to the decision making training course in both situation assessment and risk management skills. The results strongly suggest that ADM is trainable and such a training course is effective in improving the bases of in-flight decision-making.

AB - Many aeronautical decision-making (ADM) mnemonic-based methods exist. However, there is no empirical research that suggests that they are actually effective in improving decision-making. Klein (1993), in his study of naturalistic decision making, suggested that the decision-making process centers around two processes: situation assessment to generate a plausible course of action and mental simulation to evaluate that course of action for risk management. In this study a short, ADM training course was constructed around two mnemonic methods, SHOR (Stimuli, Hypotheses, Options, and Response) and DESIDE (Detect, Estimate, Set safety objectives, Identify, Do, Evaluate). Forty-one pilots from the Republic of China Tactical Training Wing participated: half received a short ADM training course and half did not. After training, the procedural knowledge underpinning their Situation Assessment and Risk Management ability, two skills essential for successful decision-making, were evaluated using pencil and paper-based knowledge tests based upon several demanding tactical flight situations. These scenarios were designed to encompass the six basic types of decision making described by Orasanu (1993); go/no go decisions; recognition-primed decisions; response selection decisions; resource management decisions; non-diagnostic procedural decisions, and decisions requiring creative problem-solving. The results show gains attributable to the decision making training course in both situation assessment and risk management skills. The results strongly suggest that ADM is trainable and such a training course is effective in improving the bases of in-flight decision-making.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=79953037106&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 6

SP - 315

EP - 333

JO - International Journal of Applied Aviation Studies

JF - International Journal of Applied Aviation Studies

SN - 1546-3214

IS - 2

ER -