The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Situation Awareness Misconceptions and Misunderstandings
Abstract
Situation awareness (SA) has become a widely used construct within the human factors community, the focus of considerable research over the past 25 years. This research has been used to drive the development of advanced information displays, the design of automated systems, information fusion algorithms, and new training approaches for improving SA in individuals and teams. In recent years, a number of papers criticized the Endsley model of SA on various grounds. I review those criticisms here and show them to be based on misunderstandings of the model. I also review several new models of SA, including situated SA, distributed SA, and sensemaking, in light of this discussion and show how they compare to existing models of SA in individuals and teams.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes.
Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D. (1977) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.84.3.231 · Cited by 11,317 · cited 1×
“However, because such linkages are generally determined through deeply imbedded mental models and schema, people would be very poor at articulating the detailed nature of those links (Nisbett & Wilson, 1977), and that is not the point of such a measure.”
BackgroundHumans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse
Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872097778543886 · Cited by 4,554
ENDSLEY, M. R., & KABER, D. B. (1999) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/001401399185595 · Cited by 1,088
Self-citationFlight-deck automation: promises and problems
WIENER, E. L., & CURRY, R. E. (1980) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140138008924809 · Cited by 599 · cited 2×
“…that leave operators with poor SA, slow to detect and to diagnose automation problems and failures, have been highly documented as a critical performance problem in many systems (Endsley & Kaber, 1996; Kaber & Endsley, 1997b, 2004; Parasuraman & Riley, 1997; Wiener & Curry, 1980; Young, 1969).”
BackgroundSituation Awareness in Anesthesia: Concept and Research
Schulz, C. M., Endsley, M. R., Kochs, E. F., Gelb, A. W., & Wagner, K. J. (2013) · Anesthesiology · doi:10.1097/aln.0b013e318280a40f · Cited by 257
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 111
- 10.1518/001872095779049462 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193129904300318 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193120004400150 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193120204600105 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193120705101203 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193120204600354 · DOI
- Cannon-Bowers J. A., 1993, Current issues in individual and group decision making, 221
- 10.1207/s15327108ijap0601_2 · DOI
- Carmody M. A., 1993, Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Aviation Psychology
- 10.1146/annurev.an.12.100183.002241 · DOI
- Chiappe D. L., 2012, Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, iFirst, 1
- 10.1080/1463922X.2011.611267 · DOI
- 10.1080/10447318.2012.634768 · DOI
- Chidester T. R., 1990, Personality factors in flight operations: Volume I. Leadership characteristics and crew performance in a full-mission air transport simulation
- 10.1207/s15327108ijap0603_1 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193120705100415 · DOI
- 10.1037/1089-2699.7.3.179 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1037/0033-2909.104.2.163 · DOI
- 10.1177/1071181311551075 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10111-003-0136-9 · DOI
- 10.1080/14639220903010092 · DOI
- Dekker S., 2004, A cognitive approach to situation awareness: Theory, measurement and application
- 10.1518/001872006779166316 · DOI
- Durso F. T., 1999, Handbook of applied cognition, 284
- 10.1177/154193128803200221 · DOI
- Endsley M. R., 1989, Tactical simulation 3 test report: Addendum 1 situation awareness evaluations
- Endsley M. R., 1990, A methodology for the objective measurement of situation awareness Situational Awareness in Aerospace Operations
- Endsley M. R., 1993, Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Aviation Psychology
- 10.1207/s15327108ijap0302_5 · DOI
- 10.1518/001872095779049543 · DOI · Paper page
- Endsley M. R., 1996, Automation and human performance: Theory and applications, 163
- Endsley M. R., 1999, Human factors in aviation systems, 257
- 10.1177/154193120004400117 · DOI
- 10.1201/b12461 · DOI
- Endsley M. R., 2004, A cognitive approach to situation awareness: Theory, measurement and application, 317
- 10.1017/CBO9780511816796.036 · DOI
- 10.1207/s15327108ijap0403_3 · DOI
- 10.1201/9780203485088 · DOI · Paper page
- Endsley M. R., 1998, Situation awareness information requirements for commercial airline pilots
- 10.1109/DASC.1998.741572 · DOI
- Endsley M. R., 2012, Designing for situation awareness: An approach to human-centered design
- Endsley M. R., 2001, New trends in cooperative activities: Understanding system dynamics in complex environments, 46
- 10.1518/001872095779064555 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1177/154193129604002107 · DOI
- 10.1016/S0169-8141(99)00073-6 · DOI
- 10.1201/b12461 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193129403800113 · DOI
- 10.2514/atcq.6.1.21 · DOI
- 10.1037/0033-295X.102.2.211 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1518/001872095779049480 · DOI
- 10.1080/14639220903009961 · DOI
- 10.1177/155534340700100103 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193120504900313 · DOI
- Gugerty L. J., 2000, Situation awareness analysis and measurement, 249
- 10.1177/1555343412451749 · DOI
- Horswill M. S., 2004, A cognitive approach to situation awareness: Theory, measurement and application, 155
- Jones D. G., 1996, Aviation, Space and Environmental Medicine, 67, 507
- Jones D. G., 2002, Measurement of shared SA in teams: In initial investigation
- 10.1177/154193120304700372 · DOI
- 10.2514/6.2009-6790 · DOI
- Jones W. M., 1997, Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Ninth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology
- 10.1177/107118139704100147 · DOI
- 10.1002/prs.680160304 · DOI
- 10.1080/1463922021000054335 · DOI
- 10.1177/001872089606380204 · DOI
- Klein G. A., 1993, Decision making in action: Models and methods, 138
- 10.1109/MIS.2006.100 · DOI
- 10.1109/MIS.2006.75 · DOI
- Klein G. A., 2007, Expertise out of context: Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Naturalistic Decision Making, 113
- 10.1518/001872005775570970 · DOI
- 10.1207/s15327876mp1603_1 · DOI
- 10.1177/154193120504900340 · DOI
- Mosier K. L., 1991, Designing for everyone, 798
- National Transportation Safety Board, 1984, Aircraft Accidents Report, Eastern Air Lines, Inc., L-1011, Miami, Florida, May 5, 1983
- 10.1080/00140130701276640 · DOI
- Orasanu J., 1990, Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 12th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society
- Orasanu J., 1995, Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Eigth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology
- Orasanu J., 1993, Decision making in action: Models and methods, 327
- 10.1518/155534308X284417 · DOI
- 10.1080/14639220903009946 · DOI
- Prince C., 1993, Cockpit resource management, 337
- Prince C., 1998, International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 1, 315
- Prince C., 1995, Experimental analysis and measurement of situation awareness
- 10.1177/154193120805200410 · DOI
- 10.21236/ADA159080 · DOI
- 10.1518/001872095779049525 · DOI
- 10.1080/14639220701561775 · DOI
- 10.1080/1463922X.2010.539289 · DOI
- 10.1080/14639220903009953 · DOI
- 10.1518/001872008X312233 · DOI
- 10.1207/s15327108ijap0101_4 · DOI
- 10.1518/001872095779049516 · DOI
- Scielzo S., 2009, Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 53rd Annual Meeting
- 10.1518/001872095779049444 · DOI
- 10.1518/hfes.46.3.461.50392 · DOI
- 10.1080/1463922X.2010.491874 · DOI
- 10.1080/14639220903009870 · DOI
- 10.1080/14639220903009938 · DOI
- 10.1080/00140130600612762 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1007/PL00011496 · DOI
- Stout R. J., 1996, Training Research Journal, 2, 85
- 10.1080/10508414.2011.556492 · DOI
- Taylor R. M., 1996, Applied aviation psychology: Achievement, change and challenge, 447
- 10.1177/1557234X0600200102 · DOI
- Uhlarik J., 2002, A review of situation awareness literature relevant to pilot surveillance functions
- Weick K. E., 1995, Sensemaking in organizations
- Weick K. E., 1999, Research in Organizational Behavior, 21, 81
- Wickens C. D., 1992, Insight: The Visual Performance Technical Group Newsletter, 14, 1
- 10.1518/001872008X288420 · DOI
- 10.1080/00140136908931083 · DOI
- 10.1080/14639220903010027 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kunze, A., Summerskill, S. J., Marshall, R., & Filtness, A. J. (2019) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139.2018.1547842 · Cited by 165
Descriptive theory of awareness for groupware development
Collazos, C. A., Gutiérrez, F. L., Gallardo, J., Ortega, M., Fardoun, H. M., & Molina, A. I. (2019) · Journal of Ambient Intelligence and Humanized Computing · doi:10.1007/s12652-018-1165-9 · Cited by 65
Weigl, M., Catchpole, K., Wehler, M., & Schneider, A. (2020) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2020.103155 · Cited by 56
Metadata
- Authors
- Endsley, M. R.
- Venue
- Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2015-02-24
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 4-32
- ISSN
- 1555-3434
- Cited by
- 501
- References
- 5
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review