Addressing the Challenges in NextGen Decision Making

Mosier, Kathleen; Fischer, Ute; Orasanu, Judith · 2012 · ROSA P / United States. Department of Transportation. Federal Aviation Administration. Human Factors Division

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

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

Summary

This interim report addresses the human factors challenges associated with flight crew decision-making in the NextGen aviation environment, characterized by increased automation and information density. The research identifies five primary impediments to effective decision-making: information overload, the need to develop new expertise for unfamiliar systems, overreliance on automation leading to bias, non-vigilance and fatigue, and the erosion of manual flying skills. The study aims to provide recommendations for crew training and automation design to mitigate these risks, ensuring pilots maintain proficiency and accurate situation awareness despite the shift toward highly automated operations. The authors employ a theoretical review of existing literature on naturalistic decision-making, crew resource management, and human factors engineering. The analysis distinguishes between "front-end" processes (judgment, situation assessment, and pattern recognition) and "back-end" processes (option selection and execution). It further categorizes cognitive strategies into "correspondence" (empirical accuracy based on probabilistic cues) and "coherence" (logical consistency based on deterministic data). The report evaluates current training paradigms, such as Recognition-Primed Decision Making, against the demands of NextGen, where electronic data requires analytical (System 2) processing rather than intuitive (System 1) pattern matching. Specific case studies, including research on Closely Spaced Parallel Runways (CSPR) approaches, are cited to illustrate the interaction between display design, automation type, and pilot workload. Key findings indicate that current training, which emphasizes intuitive pattern recognition, is insufficient for NextGen operations. Pilots must develop accurate mental models of automated systems to detect subtle failures and maintain coherence in their situation assessments. The report highlights that "change blindness" and mode confusion are significant risks when pilots lack a deep conceptual understanding of system logic. Evidence suggests that training must shift from procedural "recipes" to teaching the fundamental principles of automation functioning. Additionally, the study finds that display designs resembling familiar cues can reduce workload only when paired with familiar automation; when paired with new automation, such displays may increase cognitive load. The authors conclude that maintaining flying skills and vigilance is critical, as dependence on automation fosters complacency. The significance of this work lies in its specific recommendations for designing future flight deck systems and training programs. The authors advocate for a "Monitor and Challenge" philosophy, extending Crew Resource Management principles to include the monitoring of automation. They recommend training interventions that enhance metacognition, support the construction of coherent mental models, and explicitly teach pilots how automation functions rather than just how to operate it. By addressing the gap between pilot mental models and system behaviors, the report provides a framework for ensuring safety and efficiency in the transition to NextGen, emphasizing that human expertise must evolve to complement, rather than merely supervise, automated decision support.

Key finding

Pilots require accurate mental models of automated systems and training in coherent analytical processing to mitigate automation bias and maintain situation awareness in NextGen operations.

Methodology

review

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. Discovered via bulk_ingest_rosap on 2026-05-23 (6 acquisition events logged).

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-10; verification: verified.

Topics

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

• automation complacency bias
• mode awareness
• situational awareness