Advertisement

Development of a SAGAT Query and Simulator Experiment to Measure Situation Awareness in Maritime Navigation

  • Hui Xue
  • Bjørn-Morten BataldenEmail author
  • Johan-Fredrik Røds
Conference paper
  • 21 Downloads
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1212)

Abstract

Many ship collisions and groundings occur due to navigators’ erroneous situation awareness (SA). The objective of this study is to develop a method to measure SA for maritime navigation and collision avoidance (SA-MA). This study uses the Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique (SAGAT) as a basis and tool to assess SA. Both interviews with experts and simulator experiments are used. Ten participants, five navigators with extensive experience, and five second-year students at a nautical science program participate in the simulator experiment. Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA) is used to map the navigation and collision avoidance tasks as input to the SA queries. The objective measurements collected from the simulator and subject matter experts are used for the SAGAT score. A well-developed SAGAT query and simulator experiment results in a difference in the SA-MA between the experienced navigators and the students with less experience. The study found it is difficult to measure SA-MA, especially for level 2 and 3 SA.

Keywords

Situation Awareness (SA) SAGAT Maritime Navigation Hierarchical Task Analysis (HTA) Simulator 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance from Ingar Lorentsen and Øyvind Haugseggen at UiT the Arctic University of Norway during data collection on the simulator.

References

  1. 1.
    Yıldırım, U., Başar, E., Uğurlu, Ö.: Assessment of collisions and grounding accidents with human factors analysis and classification system (HFACS) and statistical methods. Saf. Sci. 119, 412–425 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Grech, M.R., Horberry, T., Smith, A.: Human error in maritime operations: analyses of accident reports using the Leximancer tool. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting. Sage Publications, Los Angeles (2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Endsley, M.R., Garland, D.J.: Situation Awareness Analysis and Measurement. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Koester, T.: Situation awareness and situation dependent behaviour adjustment in the maritime work domain. Hum.-Centered Comput. Cogn. Soc. Ergon. Aspects 3, 255 (2019)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Salas, E., et al.: Does crew resource management training work? An update, an extension, and some critical needs. Hum. Factors 48(2), 392–412 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stout, R.J., Salas, E., Fowlkes, J.E.: Enhancing teamwork in complex environments through team training. Group Dyn. Theory Res. Pract. 1(2), 169 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Endsley, M.R., Jones, D.G.: Designing for Situation Awareness: Understanding Situation Awareness in System Design. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2011)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sharma, A., Nazir, S., Ernstsen, J.: Situation awareness information requirements for maritime navigation: a goal directed task analysis. Saf. Sci. 120, 745–752 (2019)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Endsley, M.R.: Situation awareness global assessment technique (SAGAT). In: Proceedings of the IEEE 1988 National Aerospace and Electronics Conference. IEEE (1988)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Proctor, R.W., Proctor, J.D.: Sensation and perception. In: Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics, pp. 51–88 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Annett, J.: Hierarchical task analysis. Handb. Cogn. Task Des. 2, 17–35 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stanton, N.A., et al.: Human Factors Methods: A Practical Guide for Engineering and Design. CRC Press, Boca Raton (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Endsley, M.R.: Direct measurement of situation awareness: validity and use of SAGAT. In: Situational Awareness, pp. 129–156. Routledge (2017)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kokar, M.M., Endsley, M.R.: Situation awareness and cognitive modeling. IEEE Intell. Syst. 27(3), 91–96 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Small, G.W.: What we need to know about age related memory loss. BMJ 324(7352), 1502–1505 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Luszcz, M.A., Bryan, J.: Toward understanding age-related memory loss in late adulthood. Gerontology 45(1), 2–9 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hui Xue
    • 1
  • Bjørn-Morten Batalden
    • 1
    Email author
  • Johan-Fredrik Røds
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Science and Technology, Department of Technology and SafetyUiT The Arctic University of NorwayLangnes, TromsøNorway

Personalised recommendations