Integrated Digitised Video Recordings in Postflight-Simulator Training: A Matter of Reflection

  • Yoriko Kikkawa
  • Timothy J. MavinEmail author
Part of the Professional and Practice-based Learning book series (PPBL, volume 21)


The effects of globalisation on the airline industry cannot be understated, with worldwide airline expansion creating a critical shortage of aviation professionals. For example, a recent report predicts a potential global shortage of 160,000 pilots over the next 20 years. In many regions of the world, this shortfall has already created situations where less experienced pilots are taking on the responsibility of airline captain. As a means of maintaining the quality of pilots in this highly demanding role, the aviation industry has made great efforts in modifying the delivery of education and training programmes. As in other industries, digitalisation has become a critical part of this transformation for airline pilot training. To make further improvements to the learning experiences in high-fidelity simulators, video recordings of pilots’ performance have increasingly been used in post-simulator debriefing. Furthermore, more advanced flight-simulator video-recording systems have made it possible to record a range of information during simulator sessions (e.g. flight instruments, aircraft parameters, and visual scenes) for the purpose of playing back to pilots in debriefing rooms. It is argued by airlines and manufacturers of such systems that this type of training offers pilots an effective learning platform by observing concrete examples of their own performance. More specifically, the method enables individual pilots, and teams of pilots, to reflect on their actions and behaviours, evaluate their decision-making processes, and improve overall performance. Yet research suggests mixed findings about the benefit of the training method, and little research has investigated the learning effects of the advanced system of recording and playing back simulator sessions. This chapter describes the practice of digitalised video-assisted debriefing, explores some of the issues already identified in the broader literature, and outlines possible solutions extracted from case studies of some airlines that have been using this method to maximise learning benefits of pilots.



This chapter is based on previous work under the university–airline collaborative projects led by the second author. Thanks to Kassandra Soo and Michael Roth for assistance during some of the projects and Richard Wallace for pictures of the simulator and debriefing tool. Thanks also to Sarah Janssens and her colleagues for giving us the opportunity to observe their training workshops. The opportunity made us realise the key differences in debriefing practice discussed in this chapter.


  1. Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132–169. doi:10.3102/0034654311404435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allan, C. K., Thiagarajan, R. R., Beke, D., Imprescia, A., Kappus, L. J., Garden, A., … Weinstock, P. H. (2010). Simulation-based training delivered directly to the pediatric cardiac intensive care unit engenders preparedness, comfort, and decreased anxiety among multidisciplinary resuscitation teams. The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery, 140(3), 646–652. doi: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2010.04.027.Google Scholar
  3. Arthur, C., Kable, A., & Levett-Jones, T. (2011). Human patient simulation manikins and information communication technology use in Australian schools of nursing: A cross-sectional survey. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 7(6), e219–e227. doi:10.1016/j.ecns.2010.03.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Australian Transport Safety Bureau. (2009). ATSB transport safety investigation report: Aviation occurrence investigation, AO-2007-017 Final. Canberra: Australian Transport Safety Bureau. Retrieved from Scholar
  5. Beaubien, J. M., & Baker, D. P. (2003). Post-training feedback: The relative effectiveness of team- versus instructor-led debriefs. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 47(19), 2033–2036. doi:10.1177/154193120304701904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bingham, A. L., Sen, S., Finn, L. A., & Cawley, M. J. (2015). Retention of advanced cardiac life support knowledge and skills following high-fidelity mannequin simulation training. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 79(1), 12–19. doi:10.5688/ajpe76471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Boet, S., Bould, M. D., Bruppacher, H. R., Desjardins, F., Chandra, D. B., & Naik, V. N. (2011). Looking in the mirror: Self-debriefing versus instructor debriefing for simulated crises. Critical Care Medicine, 39(6), 1377–1381. doi:10.1097/CCM.0b013e31820eb8be.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Boet, S., Bould, M. D., Sharma, B., Revees, S., Naik, V. N., Triby, E., & Grantcharov, T. (2013). Within-team debriefing versus instructor-led debriefing for simulation-based education: A randomized controlled trial. Annals of Surgery, 258(1), 53–58. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e31829659e4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Byrne, A. J., Sellen, A. J., Jones, J. G., Aitkenhead, A. R., Hussain, S., Gilder, F., … Ribes, P. (2002). Effect of videotape feedback on anaesthetists’ performance while managing simulated anaesthetic crises: A multicentre study. Anaesthesia, 57(2), 176–179. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.2002.02361.xGoogle Scholar
  10. Cantrell, M. A. (2008). The importance of debriefing in clinical simulations. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 4(2), e19–e23. doi:10.1016/j.ecns.2008.06.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cantrell, M. A., Meakim, C., & Cash, K. (2008). Development and evaluation of three pediatric-based clinical simulation. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 4(1), e21–e28. doi:10.1016/j.ecns.2009.05.052.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cheng, A., Eppich, W., Grant, V., Sherbino, J., Zendejas, B., & Cook, D. A. (2014). Debriefing for technology-enhanced simulation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medical Education, 48(7), 657–666.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chronister, C., & Brown, D. (2012). Comparison of simulation debriefing methods. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 8(7), e281–e288. doi:10.1016/j.ecns.2010.12.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dufrene, C., & Young, A. (2014). Successful debriefing – Best methods to achieve positive learning outcomes: A literature review. Nurse Education Today, 34(3), 372–376. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2013.06.026.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Dusaj, T. K. (2014). A randomized control study comparing outcomes in student nurses who utilize video during simulation debriefing as compared to those who utilize traditional debriefing. (doctoral dissertation), State University of New Jersey, Newark, NJ. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering database. (9-B(E)).Google Scholar
  16. Elamiri, M. (2013). Plotting a path towards sustainable air transportation. International Civil Aviation Organisation Training Report, 3(1), 3.Google Scholar
  17. Fernandez, A. (2015). Meta-analysis of simulation debriefing research. (doctoral dissertation), Walden University, Minneapolis, MN. Available from Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering (2-B(E)).Google Scholar
  18. Flin, R., O’Connor, P., & Crichton, M. (2008). Safety at the sharp end: A guide to non-technical skills. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing.Google Scholar
  19. Garden, A. L., Le Fevre, D. M., Waddington, H. L., & Weller, J. M. (2015). Debriefing after simulation-based non-technical skill training in healthcare: A systematic review of effective practice. Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, 43(3), 300–308.Google Scholar
  20. Gordon, C. J., & Buckley, T. (2009). The effect of high-fidelity simulation training on medical-surgical graduate nurses’ perceived ability to respond to patient clinical emergencies. Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 40(11), 491–498. doi:10.3928/00220124-20091023-06.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grant, J. S., Moss, J., Epps, C., & Watts, P. (2010). Using video-facilitated feedback to improve student performance following high-fidelity simulation. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 6(5), e177–e184. doi:10.1016/j.ecns.2009.09.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grant, J. S., Dawkins, D., Molhook, L., Keltner, N. L., & Vance, D. E. (2014). Comparing the effectiveness of video-assisted oral debriefing and oral debriefing alone on behaviors by undergraduate nursing students during high-fidelity simulation. Nurse Education in Practice, 14(5), 479–484. doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2014.05.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hyland, J. R., & Hawkins, M. C. (2009). High-fidelity human simulation in nursing education: A review of literature and guide for implementation. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 4(1), 14–21. doi:10.1016/j.teln.2008.07.004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. International Civil Aviation Organization. (2003). Manual of criteria for the qualification of flight simulators, Doc 9625 AN/938. Montreal: Author. Retrieved from Scholar
  25. Jankouskas, T. S., Haidet, K. K., Hupcey, J. E., Kolanowski, A., & Murray, W. B. (2011). Targeted crisis resource management training improves performance among randomized nursing and medical students. Simulation in Healthcare, 6(6), 316–326. doi:10.1097/SIH.0b013e31822bc676.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kearns, S. K., Mavin, T. J., & Hodge, S. (2016). Competency-based education in aviation: Exploring alternate training pathways. Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  27. Kikkawa, Y., & Mavin, T. J. (2017). A review of debriefing practices: Towards a framework for airline pilot debriefing. Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors, 7(1), 42–54. doi:10.1027/2192-0923/a000114.Google Scholar
  28. Levett-Jones, T., & Lapkin, S. (2014). A systematic review of the effectiveness of simulation debriefing in health professional education. Nurse Education Today, 34(6), e58–e63. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2013.09.020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Mavin, T. J. (2016). Models for and practice of continuous professional development for airline pilots: What we can learn from one regional airline. In S. Billett, D. Dymock, & S. Choi (Eds.), Supporting learning across working life: Models, processes and practices (pp. 169–188). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  30. Mavin, T. J., & Dall’Alba, G. (2010). A model for integrating technical skills and NTS in assessing pilots’ performance. In M. Tood & M. Thomas (Eds.), Proceedings of the 9th international symposium of the Australian Aviation Psychology Association: Managing safety – Maximising performance. Symposium Proceedings (pp. 9–12). Australian Aviation Psychology Association: Sydney.Google Scholar
  31. Mavin, T. J., Kikkawa, Y., & Billett, S. (in review n.d.). Key contributing factors to learning through debriefings: Commercial aviation pilots’ perspectives. Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  32. Mavin, T. J., & Roth, W.-M. (2014). A holistic view of cockpit performance: An analysis of the assessment discourse of flight examiners. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 24(3), 210–227. doi:10.1080/10508414.2014.918434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Munro, I., & Mavin, T. J. (2012). Crawl-walk-run. Paper presented at the 10th International Symposium of the Australian Aviation Psychology Association, Sydney, Australia.Google Scholar
  34. Nilsen, S., & Baerheim, A. (2005). Feedback on video recorded consultations in medical teaching: Why students loathe and love it – A focus-group based qualitative study. BMC Medical Education, 5(1), 28. doi:10.1186/1472-6920-5-28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. O’Meara, P., Munro, G., Williams, B., Cooper, S., Bogossian, F., Ross, L., … McClounan, M. (2015). Developing situation awareness amongst nursing and paramedicine students utilizing eye tracking technology and video debriefing techniques: A proof of concept paper. International Emergency Nursing, 23(2), 94–99. doi: 10.1016/j.ienj.2014.11.001.Google Scholar
  36. Raemer, D., Anderson, M., Cheng, A., Fanning, R., Nadkarni, V., & Savoldelli, G. (2011). Research regarding debriefing as part of the learning process. Simulation in Healthcare, 6(Suppl), S52–S57. doi:10.1097/SIH.0b013e31822724d0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Reed, S. J., Andrews, C. M., & Ravert, P. (2013). Debriefing simulations: Comparison of debriefing with video and debriefing alone. Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 9(12), 585–591. doi:10.1016/j.ecns.2013.05.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Roth, W.-M. (2015a). Cultural practices and cognition in debriefing: The case of aviation. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 9(3), 263–278. doi:10.1177/1555343415591395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Roth, W.-M. (2015b). Flight examiners’ methods of ascertaining pilot proficiency. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 25(3–4), 209–226. doi:10.1080/10508414.2015.1162642.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Roth, W.-M. (2015c). The role of soci(et)al relations in a technology-rich teaching | learning setting: The case of professional development of airline pilots. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 7, 43–58. doi:10.1016/j.lcsi.2015.07.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Roth, W.-M., & Jornet, A. (2015). Situational awareness as an instructable and instructed matter in multi-media supported debriefing: A case study from aviation. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW), 24(5), 461–508. doi:10.1007/s10606-015-9234-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Roth, W.-M., Mavin, T. J., & Munro, I. (2015). How a cockpit forgets speeds (and speed-related events): Toward a kinetic description of joint cognitive systems. Cognition, Technology & Work, 17(2), 279–299. doi:10.1007/s10111-014-0292-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Savoldelli, G. L., Naik, V. N., Park, J., Joo, H. S., Chow, R., & Hamstra, S. J. (2006). Value of debriefing during simulated crisis management: Oral versus video-assisted oral feedback. Anesthesiology, 105(2), 279–285. doi:10.1097/00000542-200608000-00010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Sawyer, T., Sierocka-Castaneda, A., Chan, D., Berg, B., Lustik, M., & Thompson, M. (2012). The effectiveness of video-assisted debriefing versus oral debriefing alone at improving neonatal resuscitation performance: A randomized trial. Simulation in Healthcare, 7(4), 213–221. doi:10.1097/SIH.0b013e3182578eae.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sethi, A. K. (2013). Media recorders/players, mobile phones, smart devices, and tablets. In A. K. Sethi & M. Palgrave (Eds.), The business of electronics: A concise history (pp. 87–111). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. doi:10.1057/9781137323385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Shortridge, A., McPherson, M., & Loving, G. (2014). Using web-based guided reflection with video to enhance high fidelity undergraduate nursing clinical skills education. International Journal on E-Learning, 13(1), 63–78.Google Scholar
  47. Sukalich, S., Elliott, J. O., & Ruffner, G. (2014). Teaching medical error disclosure to residents using patient-centered simulation training. Academic Medicine, 89(1), 136–143. doi:10.1097/acm.0000000000000046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tannenbaum, S. I., & Cerasoli, C. P. (2013). Do team and individual debriefs enhance performance? A meta-analysis. Human Factors, 55(1), 231–245. doi:10.1177/0018720812448394.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Vigeant, D., Lefebvre, H., & Reidy, M. (2008). The use of video as a pedagogic tool for the training of perioperative nurses: A literature review. Canadian Operating Room Nursing Journal, 26(1), 8–1520.Google Scholar
  50. Welke, T. M., LeBlanc, V. R., Savoldelli, G. L., Joo, H. S., Chandra, D. B., Crabtree, N. A., & Naik, V. N. (2009). Personalized oral debriefing versus standardized multimedia instruction after patient crisis simulation. Anesthesia and Analgesia, 109(1), 183–189. doi:10.1213/ane.0b013e3181a324ab.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Griffith UniversityNathanAustralia

Personalised recommendations