How a cockpit calculates its speeds and why errors while doing this are so hard to detect

Recent incidents have shown that the production of take-off speeds is an activity vulnerable to miscalculations with a potential for disastrous outcomes. The aim of this paper is to analyze the calculation of the take-off speeds in a modern airline cockpit as a distributed cognitive activity in orde...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cognition, technology & work technology & work, 2011-11, Vol.13 (4), p.217-231
Hauptverfasser: Henriqson, Eder, van Winsen, Roel, Saurin, Tarcisio Abreu, Dekker, Sidney W. A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 231
container_issue 4
container_start_page 217
container_title Cognition, technology & work
container_volume 13
creator Henriqson, Eder
van Winsen, Roel
Saurin, Tarcisio Abreu
Dekker, Sidney W. A.
description Recent incidents have shown that the production of take-off speeds is an activity vulnerable to miscalculations with a potential for disastrous outcomes. The aim of this paper is to analyze the calculation of the take-off speeds in a modern airline cockpit as a distributed cognitive activity in order to identify possible vulnerabilities in this process. We took the cockpit as the joint cognitive system under analysis and conducted an ethnographic study based on documental analysis, flight observations, interviews, and the analysis of 22 events involving failures related to the calculation of take-off speeds. The main argument is that the cognitive systems engineering perspective, with less focus on the human contribution than it is common in investigations, levels people and artifacts in the system as equal contributors to its eventual performance. Our analysis identified four assertions regarding vulnerabilities in the process of take-off speeds calculation: (1) representations at the level of the cockpit are always partial and incomplete; (2) some interactions require interpretation rather than institution; (3) interactions of agents do not follow a canonical process of coordination; (4) the control of the prevention of failures is accurate but inadequate. These vulnerabilities are a matter of interactions among cognitive systems in the cockpit, rather than vulnerabilities of individual agents, such as humans or artifacts.
doi_str_mv 10.1007/s10111-010-0161-4
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_898677918</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2487567121</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c369t-d8fc0e2194c861b666f6f59f763f828ae725615f627f083f72b229e9a8ef30533</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kEFLAzEQhYMoWKs_wFvwvprJbrLZoxS1QsGLHjyFNDtpt66bNUkp_femVPTkYZgH894b-Ai5BnYLjNV3ERgAFAxYHglFdUImUJWiEELK018t1Dm5iHHDGAhV8gl5n_sdNdR6-zF2iVrT221vEkbapUjjiNhGaoaW7tZ7iiH4ELPseqSt74YVTesu3wPS6OnahJYmT1tMaNMlOXOmj3j1s6fk7fHhdTYvFi9Pz7P7RWFL2aSiVc4y5NBUVklYSimddKJxtSyd4spgzYUE4SSvHVOlq_mS8wYbo9CVTJTllNwce8fgv7YYk974bRjyS60aJeu6AZVNcDTZ4GMM6PQYuk8T9hqYPgDUR4A6A9QHgLrKGX7MxOwdVhj-iv8PfQP6SXH8</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>898677918</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How a cockpit calculates its speeds and why errors while doing this are so hard to detect</title><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>Henriqson, Eder ; van Winsen, Roel ; Saurin, Tarcisio Abreu ; Dekker, Sidney W. A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Henriqson, Eder ; van Winsen, Roel ; Saurin, Tarcisio Abreu ; Dekker, Sidney W. A.</creatorcontrib><description>Recent incidents have shown that the production of take-off speeds is an activity vulnerable to miscalculations with a potential for disastrous outcomes. The aim of this paper is to analyze the calculation of the take-off speeds in a modern airline cockpit as a distributed cognitive activity in order to identify possible vulnerabilities in this process. We took the cockpit as the joint cognitive system under analysis and conducted an ethnographic study based on documental analysis, flight observations, interviews, and the analysis of 22 events involving failures related to the calculation of take-off speeds. The main argument is that the cognitive systems engineering perspective, with less focus on the human contribution than it is common in investigations, levels people and artifacts in the system as equal contributors to its eventual performance. Our analysis identified four assertions regarding vulnerabilities in the process of take-off speeds calculation: (1) representations at the level of the cockpit are always partial and incomplete; (2) some interactions require interpretation rather than institution; (3) interactions of agents do not follow a canonical process of coordination; (4) the control of the prevention of failures is accurate but inadequate. These vulnerabilities are a matter of interactions among cognitive systems in the cockpit, rather than vulnerabilities of individual agents, such as humans or artifacts.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1435-5558</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1435-5566</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10111-010-0161-4</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CTWOF8</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London: Springer-Verlag</publisher><subject>Aerospace Technology and Astronautics ; Aircraft accidents &amp; safety ; Automotive Engineering ; Cognitive Psychology ; Computer Science ; Engineering ; Error correction &amp; detection ; Industrial and Organizational Psychology ; Medicine/Public Health ; Original Research ; User Interfaces and Human Computer Interaction</subject><ispartof>Cognition, technology &amp; work, 2011-11, Vol.13 (4), p.217-231</ispartof><rights>Springer-Verlag London Limited 2010</rights><rights>Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c369t-d8fc0e2194c861b666f6f59f763f828ae725615f627f083f72b229e9a8ef30533</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c369t-d8fc0e2194c861b666f6f59f763f828ae725615f627f083f72b229e9a8ef30533</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10111-010-0161-4$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10111-010-0161-4$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27922,27923,41486,42555,51317</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Henriqson, Eder</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Winsen, Roel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saurin, Tarcisio Abreu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dekker, Sidney W. A.</creatorcontrib><title>How a cockpit calculates its speeds and why errors while doing this are so hard to detect</title><title>Cognition, technology &amp; work</title><addtitle>Cogn Tech Work</addtitle><description>Recent incidents have shown that the production of take-off speeds is an activity vulnerable to miscalculations with a potential for disastrous outcomes. The aim of this paper is to analyze the calculation of the take-off speeds in a modern airline cockpit as a distributed cognitive activity in order to identify possible vulnerabilities in this process. We took the cockpit as the joint cognitive system under analysis and conducted an ethnographic study based on documental analysis, flight observations, interviews, and the analysis of 22 events involving failures related to the calculation of take-off speeds. The main argument is that the cognitive systems engineering perspective, with less focus on the human contribution than it is common in investigations, levels people and artifacts in the system as equal contributors to its eventual performance. Our analysis identified four assertions regarding vulnerabilities in the process of take-off speeds calculation: (1) representations at the level of the cockpit are always partial and incomplete; (2) some interactions require interpretation rather than institution; (3) interactions of agents do not follow a canonical process of coordination; (4) the control of the prevention of failures is accurate but inadequate. These vulnerabilities are a matter of interactions among cognitive systems in the cockpit, rather than vulnerabilities of individual agents, such as humans or artifacts.</description><subject>Aerospace Technology and Astronautics</subject><subject>Aircraft accidents &amp; safety</subject><subject>Automotive Engineering</subject><subject>Cognitive Psychology</subject><subject>Computer Science</subject><subject>Engineering</subject><subject>Error correction &amp; detection</subject><subject>Industrial and Organizational Psychology</subject><subject>Medicine/Public Health</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>User Interfaces and Human Computer Interaction</subject><issn>1435-5558</issn><issn>1435-5566</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kEFLAzEQhYMoWKs_wFvwvprJbrLZoxS1QsGLHjyFNDtpt66bNUkp_femVPTkYZgH894b-Ai5BnYLjNV3ERgAFAxYHglFdUImUJWiEELK018t1Dm5iHHDGAhV8gl5n_sdNdR6-zF2iVrT221vEkbapUjjiNhGaoaW7tZ7iiH4ELPseqSt74YVTesu3wPS6OnahJYmT1tMaNMlOXOmj3j1s6fk7fHhdTYvFi9Pz7P7RWFL2aSiVc4y5NBUVklYSimddKJxtSyd4spgzYUE4SSvHVOlq_mS8wYbo9CVTJTllNwce8fgv7YYk974bRjyS60aJeu6AZVNcDTZ4GMM6PQYuk8T9hqYPgDUR4A6A9QHgLrKGX7MxOwdVhj-iv8PfQP6SXH8</recordid><startdate>20111101</startdate><enddate>20111101</enddate><creator>Henriqson, Eder</creator><creator>van Winsen, Roel</creator><creator>Saurin, Tarcisio Abreu</creator><creator>Dekker, Sidney W. A.</creator><general>Springer-Verlag</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PADUT</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20111101</creationdate><title>How a cockpit calculates its speeds and why errors while doing this are so hard to detect</title><author>Henriqson, Eder ; van Winsen, Roel ; Saurin, Tarcisio Abreu ; Dekker, Sidney W. A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c369t-d8fc0e2194c861b666f6f59f763f828ae725615f627f083f72b229e9a8ef30533</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Aerospace Technology and Astronautics</topic><topic>Aircraft accidents &amp; safety</topic><topic>Automotive Engineering</topic><topic>Cognitive Psychology</topic><topic>Computer Science</topic><topic>Engineering</topic><topic>Error correction &amp; detection</topic><topic>Industrial and Organizational Psychology</topic><topic>Medicine/Public Health</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>User Interfaces and Human Computer Interaction</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Henriqson, Eder</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>van Winsen, Roel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Saurin, Tarcisio Abreu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Dekker, Sidney W. A.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Research Library China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Cognition, technology &amp; work</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Henriqson, Eder</au><au>van Winsen, Roel</au><au>Saurin, Tarcisio Abreu</au><au>Dekker, Sidney W. A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How a cockpit calculates its speeds and why errors while doing this are so hard to detect</atitle><jtitle>Cognition, technology &amp; work</jtitle><stitle>Cogn Tech Work</stitle><date>2011-11-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>13</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>217</spage><epage>231</epage><pages>217-231</pages><issn>1435-5558</issn><eissn>1435-5566</eissn><coden>CTWOF8</coden><abstract>Recent incidents have shown that the production of take-off speeds is an activity vulnerable to miscalculations with a potential for disastrous outcomes. The aim of this paper is to analyze the calculation of the take-off speeds in a modern airline cockpit as a distributed cognitive activity in order to identify possible vulnerabilities in this process. We took the cockpit as the joint cognitive system under analysis and conducted an ethnographic study based on documental analysis, flight observations, interviews, and the analysis of 22 events involving failures related to the calculation of take-off speeds. The main argument is that the cognitive systems engineering perspective, with less focus on the human contribution than it is common in investigations, levels people and artifacts in the system as equal contributors to its eventual performance. Our analysis identified four assertions regarding vulnerabilities in the process of take-off speeds calculation: (1) representations at the level of the cockpit are always partial and incomplete; (2) some interactions require interpretation rather than institution; (3) interactions of agents do not follow a canonical process of coordination; (4) the control of the prevention of failures is accurate but inadequate. These vulnerabilities are a matter of interactions among cognitive systems in the cockpit, rather than vulnerabilities of individual agents, such as humans or artifacts.</abstract><cop>London</cop><pub>Springer-Verlag</pub><doi>10.1007/s10111-010-0161-4</doi><tpages>15</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1435-5558
ispartof Cognition, technology & work, 2011-11, Vol.13 (4), p.217-231
issn 1435-5558
1435-5566
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_898677918
source SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Aerospace Technology and Astronautics
Aircraft accidents & safety
Automotive Engineering
Cognitive Psychology
Computer Science
Engineering
Error correction & detection
Industrial and Organizational Psychology
Medicine/Public Health
Original Research
User Interfaces and Human Computer Interaction
title How a cockpit calculates its speeds and why errors while doing this are so hard to detect
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T20%3A36%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How%20a%20cockpit%20calculates%20its%20speeds%20and%20why%20errors%20while%20doing%20this%20are%20so%20hard%20to%20detect&rft.jtitle=Cognition,%20technology%20&%20work&rft.au=Henriqson,%20Eder&rft.date=2011-11-01&rft.volume=13&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=217&rft.epage=231&rft.pages=217-231&rft.issn=1435-5558&rft.eissn=1435-5566&rft.coden=CTWOF8&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10111-010-0161-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2487567121%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=898677918&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true