Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stankovic, S.
Right arrow Articles by Averty, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Stankovic, S.
Right arrow Articles by Averty, P.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Determinants of Conflict Detection: A Model of Risk Judgments in Air Traffic Control

Stéphanie Stankovic

University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France, stankovic{at}univ-tlse2.fr

Éric Raufaste

University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France

Philippe Averty

French Civil Aviation Authority, Toulouse, France

Objective: A model of conflict judgments in air traffic control (ATC) is proposed. Background: Three horizontal distances determine risk judgments about conflict between two aircraft: (a) Dt0 is the distance between the crossing of the aircraft trajectories and the first aircraft to reach that point; (b) Dth is the distance between the two aircraft when they are horizontally closest; and (c) Dtv is the horizontal distance between the two aircraft when their growing vertical distance reaches 1,000 feet. Methods: Two experiments tested whether the variables in the model reflect what controllers do. In Experiment 1, 125 certified controllers provided risk judgments about situations in which the model variables were manipulated. Experiment 2 investigated the relationship between the model and expertise by comparing a population of certified controllers with a population of ATC students. Results: Across both experiments, the model accounted for 44% to 50% of the variance in risk judgments by certified controllers (N = 161) but only 20% in judgments by ATC students (N = 88). There were major individual differences in the predictive power of the model as well as in the contributions of the three variables. In Experiment 2, the model described experts better than novices. Conclusion: The model provided a satisfying account of the data, albeit with substantial individual differences. It is argued that an individual-differences approach is required when investigating the strategies involved in conflict judgment in ATC. Application: These findings should have implications for developing user-friendly interfaces with conflict detection devices and for devising ATC training programs.

Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Vol. 50, No. 1, 121-134 (2008)
DOI: 10.1518/001872008X250584
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics SocietyHome page
A. Neal and P. J. Kwantes
An Evidence Accumulation Model for Conflict Detection Performance in a Simulated Air Traffic Control Task
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, April 1, 2009; 51(2): 164 - 180.
[Abstract] [PDF]