Errors in air-ground pilot communication: an experimental study

Estival, Dominique; Molesworth, Brett Robert Charles · 2020 · Crossref

DOI: 10.23925/2318-7115.2020v41i3a5

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates communication errors in air-ground pilot interactions, addressing the critical safety implications of miscommunication in aviation. Motivated by incidents where language barriers and cognitive overload contributed to accidents, the research examines how factors such as language background, pilot qualification, workload, and Air Traffic Control (ATC) speech rate influence error types. The authors aim to determine whether different conditions affect the nature of errors (omissions vs. mistakes), whether words and numerals yield different error patterns, and which aviation information items are most susceptible to errors. The methodology employed a flight simulator experiment involving 17 pilots (8 native English speakers and 9 non-native speakers) with varying qualifications (Private or Commercial Pilot Licenses). Participants completed eight flight scenarios designed to manipulate four variables: ATC speech rate (baseline vs. fast), information density (low vs. high item count), pilot workload (normal vs. high), and radio congestion. Audio recordings of pilot transmissions were analyzed against expected phraseology to categorize errors as omissions (failing to transmit information) or mistakes (transmitting incorrect information), and further classified by whether the error involved lexical words or numerals. The results revealed that omissions were significantly more common than mistakes overall (22.94% vs. 2.72%). The nature of errors varied primarily under conditions affecting communication difficulty rather than cognitive workload alone. Increased information density led to a higher proportion of mistakes, particularly among pilots with lower qualifications. Conversely, increased ATC speech rate produced complex interactions between language background and qualification; notably, low-qualified non-native speakers tended to omit information rather than risk making mistakes, whereas low-qualified native speakers made more mistakes. Regarding content, errors involving numerals were more frequent than those involving words, likely due to the larger range of possible numerical values and lower predictability. The study concludes that pilot training quality is a crucial determinant of communication accuracy, often outweighing language background or flight hours. The findings suggest that ATC should tailor responses to error types: reducing workload when omissions occur and simplifying communication (slower speech, fewer items) when mistakes are detected. These results have significant implications for aviation safety, pilot training, and the teaching of English for Specific Purposes, highlighting that both native and non-native speakers require rigorous training in aviation communication protocols to mitigate risks in high-stakes environments.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• human error taxonomy