The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Pilot Interaction With Cockpit Automation: Operational Experiences With the Flight Management System
Abstract
Due to recent incidents involving glass cockpit aircraft, there is growing concern about cockpit automation and its potential effects on pilot performance. However, little is known about the nature and causes of problems that arise in pilot-automation interaction. In this article, we report the results of two studies that provide converging, complementary data on pilots' difficulties with understanding and operating one of the core systems of cockpit automation, the Flight Management System (FMS). As vehicles to gather a corpus on the nature and variety of FMS-related problems, we used a survey asking pilots to describe specific incidents with the FMS, and we used the observations of pilots undergoing transition training to a glass cockpit aircraft. The results of both studies indicate that pilots become proficient in standard FMS operations through ground training and subsequent line experience. But even with considerable line experience, they still have difficulties tracking FMS status and behavior in certain flight contexts, and they show gaps in their understanding of the functional structure of the system. The results suggest that design-related factors such as opaque interfaces contribute to these difficulties, which can affect pilots' situation awareness. The results of this research are relevant for both the design of cockpit automation and the development of training curricula specifically tailored to the needs of glass cockpits.
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
Reason, J. (1990) · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139062367 · Cited by 5,108
Education and thinking: The role of knowledge.
Glaser, R. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.2.93 · Cited by 1,272
Cited by
Humans: Still Vital After All These Years of Automation
Parasuraman, R., & Wickens, C. D. (2008) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872008x312198 · Cited by 401
Towards a cognitive approach to human–machine cooperation in dynamic situations
HOC, J.-M. (2001) · International Journal of Human-Computer Studies · doi:10.1006/ijhc.2000.0454 · Cited by 387
Sebok, A., & Wickens, C. D. (2017) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720816665201 · Cited by 75
Designing for Situation Awareness and Trust in Automation
Wickens, C. D. (1995) · IFAC Proceedings Volumes · doi:10.1016/s1474-6670(17)46646-8 · Cited by 68
Sebok, A., Wickens, C., Sarter, N., Quesada, S., Socash, C., & Anthony, B. (2012) · Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries · doi:10.1002/hfm.20389 · Cited by 12
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Sarter, N. B., & Woods, D. D.
- Venue
- The International Journal of Aviation Psychology
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1992-10
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 303-321
- ISSN
- 1050-8414 (ISSN-L)
- 1532-7108
- OpenAlex
- W1997125718
- Cited by
- 255
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 22.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Pilot Interaction With Cockpit Automation: Operational Experiences With the Flight Management System. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1207/s15327108ijap0204_5
- The paper
- Sarter, N. B., & Woods, D. D. (1992). Pilot Interaction With Cockpit Automation: Operational Experiences With the Flight Management System. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327108ijap0204_5
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.