The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Situation Awareness and the Cognitive Management of Complex Systems
Abstract
The issue of how to support situation awareness among operators of complex systems or vehicles is a growing concern in a number of industries, especially when automation takes the operators partly "out of the loop." Cognitive theory suggests that comprehension of the flow of events is an active process, constrained by the dynamics and modularity of attention and memory. Focusing on issues of commercial aviation, we review the meaning of the term situation awareness both definition ally and by way of examples. We then discuss the cognitive factors involved in achieving and maintaining situation awareness, drawing on recent cognitive theory to clarify their interactions. Finally, having emphasized the need for a more analytic and precise understanding of situation awareness, we discuss strengths and weaknesses of various empirical approaches that might be used toward that end.
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
The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception
Bornstein, M. H., & Gibson, J. J. (1980) · The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism · doi:10.2307/429816 · Cited by 22,935
Plans and the structure of behavior.
Miller, G. A., Galanter, E., & Pribram, K. H. (1960) · doi:10.1037/10039-000 · Cited by 4,630
Performance Consequences of Automation-Induced 'Complacency'
Parasuraman, R., Molloy, R., & Singh, I. L. (1993) · The International Journal of Aviation Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327108ijap0301_1 · Cited by 875
What makes interruptions disruptive? A study of length, similarity, and complexity
Gillie, T., & Broadbent, D. (1989) · Psychological Research · doi:10.1007/bf00309260 · Cited by 490
Cited by
The Scope and Importance of Human Interruption in Human-Computer Interaction Design
McFarlane, D. C., & Latorella, K. A. (2002) · Human–Computer Interaction · doi:10.1207/s15327051hci1701_1 · Cited by 536
Situation Awareness Misconceptions and Misunderstandings
Endsley, M. R. (2015) · Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making · doi:10.1177/1555343415572631 · Cited by 501
Teamwork in multi-person systems: a review and analysis
Paris, C. R., Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2000) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140130050084879 · Cited by 308
Predicting human interruptibility with sensors: a Wizard of Oz feasibility study
Hudson, S., Fogarty, J., Atkeson, C., Avrahami, D., Forlizzi, J., Kiesler, S., Lee, J., & Yang, J. (2003) · Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems · doi:10.1145/642611.642657 · Cited by 295
Situation awareness during driving: Explicit and implicit knowledge in dynamic spatial memory.
Gugerty, L. J. (1997) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied · doi:10.1037/1076-898x.3.1.42 · Cited by 227
Metadata
- Authors
- Adams, M. J., Tenney, Y. J., & Pew, R. W.
- Venue
- Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1995-03
- Volume
- 37
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 85-104
- ISSN
- 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-8181
- OpenAlex
- W2024378172
- Cited by
- 531
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 21.53
- 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
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.
