With the arrival of new technologies more en-route traffic information sources have become available, especially in-car information sources. The aim of this study is to gain more insight into the effect of multiple, and possibly conflicting, sources of information on route choice and driver behaviour. In a driving simulator experiment, participants were required to make multiple drives, each of which ended with a choice between the normal and an alternative route. On each trial participants received traffic information from a Variable Message Sign (VMS), i.e. a dynamic sign above the road providing descriptive traffic information in the form of expected travel times (ETTs), a navigation device providing in-car prescriptive route advice, or information from both sources. In the latter type of trial the information could be congruent or conflicting with regards to ETTs on the VMS and advise from the navigation. After each trial, participants indicated how much trust they had in the traffic information and their primary information source. A Bayesian model was used to quantify the propensity to switch to the alternative route. Results indicate that overall compliance was very high for the primary source even when the other source did not corroborate this information and that most participants preferred to use the information from a VMS. However, when both the VMS and the navigation device provided information and the VMS indicated the same ETTs for the normal and alternative route, route choice was influenced by the advice provided by the navigation device. Also, in this type of trial mean speed was significantly lower compared to trials in which the two sources were in conflict, indicating increased mental workload, most likely due to attentional dissonance: a situation in which stimuli compete for attention resulting in cognitive conflict and the need to inhibit non-relevant information. A deeper understanding of how drivers use multiple traffic information sources and cope with irrelevant information could support driver safety and comfort, increase the usability of information sources, and help reduce stress, anxiety, and information overload while driving.

Within current debates about the future impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on human society, roughly three different perspectives can be recognised: (1) the technology-centric perspective, claiming that AI will soon outperform humankind in all areas, and that the primary threat for humankind is superintelligence; (2) the human-centric perspective, claiming that humans will always remain superior to AI when it comes to social and societal aspects, and that the main threat of AI is that humankind’s social nature is overlooked in technological designs; and (3) the collective intelligence-centric perspective, claiming that true intelligence lies in the collective of intelligent agents, both human and artificial, and that the main threat for humankind is that technological designs create problems at the collective, systemic level that are hard to oversee and control. The current paper offers the following contributions: (a) a clear description for each of the three perspectives, along with their history and background; (b) an analysis and interpretation of current applications of AI in human society according to each of the three perspectives, thereby disentangling miscommunication in the debate concerning threats of AI; and (c) a new integrated and comprehensive research design framework that addresses all aspects of the above three perspectives, and includes principles that support developers to reflect and anticipate upon potential effects of AI in society.

Previous studies show that pilots sometimes make roll reversal errors (RREs) when responding to the aircraft bank angle shown on the attitude indicator (AI). This is suggestive of a perceptual ambiguity in the AI. In the current study, we investigated whether expectation contributes to such misperception. Twenty nonpilots performed tasks in a fixed-base flight simulator. Their expectation about the bank angle was manipulated with a flying task using outside view only. When flying at a bank angle, the outside view disappeared, a moving-horizon type AI was shown, and participants had to roll the wings level, trusting the AI. The AI often matched the previously flown turn. However, in some runs, it showed an opposite bank direction (Opposite condition), which was hypothesized to facilitate a misperception. In some other runs, it showed level flight (Level condition), which should not facilitate this. In a second session, participants rolled wings level without preceding flying task (Baseline condition). Participants made 11.2 times more RREs in the Opposite condition (75% error rate) compared to Baseline condition (6.7%), and 2.5 times more compared to the Level condition (30%). This indicates that RREs were in many cases caused by expectation-induced misperception of the AI bank angle.

Background Mnemonic-type startle and surprise procedures were previously proposed to help pilots cope with startle and surprise in-flight, but effects on performance after procedure execution have not yet been investigated. Objective Thus, we tested the effectiveness a new mnemonic-type procedure in a moving-base simulator with a non-linear model of a small twin-propeller aircraft flown single-pilot. Method An experimental group of twelve line pilots was trained to use a four-item procedure: 1.Calm down: take a deep breath, sit up straight and relax shoulders and hands. 2.Observe: call out the basic flight parameters. 3.Outline: formulate a hypothesis about the problem. 4.Lead: formulate and execute a plan of action. A control group of twelve line pilots received a control training. Next, all pilots performed four scenarios with startling and surprising events. Data were obtained on pilot performance, stress, procedure application and evaluation. Results Application of the procedure in the test scenarios was high (90.0% full, 100.0% partly), and pilots evaluated the procedure positively (median: 4 on a 1-5 point scale). There was significantly superior decision-making in the experimental group, but immediate responses were significantly less optimal. Pilots sometimes applied the procedure at inappropriate moments. Conclusion The results of the tested mnemonic-type procedure were promising. The procedure may benefit, however, from modifications to reduce complexity and to stimulate application at the appropriate moment.

Pilots in todays aircraft are supported by sophisticated levels of cockpit automation and standardized procedures. In spite of this, safety may still decrease considerably in moments when workload becomes excessive or when situational awareness is degraded. In two flight simulation experiments, the potential benefits of duro-dimensional (3D) visual (perspective) and auditory radar displays for situational awareness support were investigated. A target localization task was employed in which subjects, flying a fighter aircraft, were required to locate a target that suddenly appeared. Then, a target intercept manoeuvre had to be performed as quickly as possible. Pilot task performance was determined in terms of target acquisition time and mental workload. Results show that 3D visual information considerably unproved task performance, whereas task performance with 3D auditory displays was comparable with a 2D visual display. However, simultaneous presentation of auditory and visual display information clearly improved performance with a 2D visual display, little improvement was found widi die 3D visual displays. Implications of 3D visual and auditory displays for pilot support are discussed.

We hypothesized that an incorrect expectation due to spatial disorientation may induce roll reversal errors. To test this, an in-flight experiment was performed, in which forty non-pilots rolled wings level after receiving motion cues. A No-leans condition (subthreshold motion to a bank angle) was included, as well as a Leans-opposite condition (leans cues, opposite to the bank angle) and a Leans-level condition (leans cues, but level flight). The presence of leans cues led to an increase of the roll reversal error (RRE) rate by a factor of 2.6. There was no significant difference between the Leans-opposite and Leans-level condition. This suggests that the expectation strongly affects the occurrence of an RRE, and that people tend to base their responses on motion cues instead of on information on the AI. We conclude that expectation and spatial disorientation have a large effect on piloting errors and may cause hazardous aircraft upsets.

Aviation safety organizations have recommended that airline pilots are trained for startle and surprise. However, little information is available on useful training interventions. Therefore, a training intervention trial was executed during airline recurrent simulator training. The method consisted of a slow visual scan from the side-window, over the instruments, ending with facing the other pilot. Following a recorded video instruction, 38 airline pilots in two-pilot crews performed a training scenario in which they could apply the method. Data on application and evaluation of the method were obtained from each pilot. Few pilots actually applied the method (18.4%), and many gave low ratings to applicability of the method in the scenario, as well as in operational practice. Results show that a startle management method, as well as manner in which it is trained, should be carefully evaluated before being implemented in training practice. Accepted author manuscript.

Several checklist-based methods have been proposed to help pilots manage startle in unexpected situations. In the current experiment, we tested how pilots reacted to using such a method, which featured the mnemonic COOL: Calm down – Observe – Outline – Lead. Using a motion-based simulator outfitted with a non-linear aerodynamic model of a small twin-propeller aircraft, twelve pilots practiced using the COOL method before performing four test scenarios involving startling events. Application of the full method in the test scenarios was high (90-100%), and pilots rated the method on average as useful (4 on a 1-5 point Likert scale). The first two steps of the method were seen as the “core” of the method. However, pilots also displayed difficulty with prioritizing dealing with immediate threats over executing the method. The results are promising, but they also warn us to be cautious when introducing a startle management method. Accepted author manuscript.

OBJECTIVE:This study tested whether simulator-based training of pilot responses to unexpected or novel events can be improved by including unpredictability and variability in training scenarios.BACKGROUND:Current regulations allow for highly predictable and invariable training, which may not be sufficient to prepare pilots for unexpected or novel situations in-flight. Training for surprise will become mandatory in the near future.METHOD:Using an aircraft model largely unfamiliar to the participants, one group of 10 pilots (the unpredictable and variable [U/V] group) practiced responses to controllability issues in a relatively U/V manner. A control group of another 10 pilots practiced the same failures in a highly predictable and invariable manner. After the practice, performance of all pilots was tested in a surprise scenario, in which the pilots had to apply the learned knowledge. To control for surprise habituation and familiarization with the controls, two control tests were included.RESULTS:Whereas the U/V group required more time than the control group to identify failures during the practice, the results indicated superior understanding and performance in the U/V group as compared to the control group in the surprise test. There were no significant differences between the groups in surprise or performance in the control tests.CONCLUSION:Given the results, we conclude that organizing pilot training in a more U/V way improves transfer of training to unexpected situations in-flight.APPLICATION:The outcomes suggest that the inclusion of U/V simulator training scenarios is important when training pilots for unexpected situations.

Previous studies have shown that identifiability of sound sources influence noise annoyance levels. The aim of the present experiment was to additionally study the effects of actively performing a task versus a less active pastime on noise annoyance. This was done by asking participants to perform a task (task condition) or read a magazine of their choice (no-task condition), while listening to identifiable and unidentifiable samples of transportation noise at varying sound exposure levels (55-85 ASEL). Annoyance was higher for identifiable samples (recordings) than for unidentifiable transformed samples (with equal spectral energy and envelope). Although there was no main effect of activity type on noise annoyance, for the transformed samples, an interaction was found between activity type and sound exposure levels: annoyance started lower in the no-task condition, but rose more steeply with ascending exposure levels than was the case during task performance (large effect). When assessing order effects, it was found that annoyance was higher when the task condition came first, especially for lower sound exposure levels (large effects). It is therefore concluded that the type of activity and the condition order do influence noise annoyance but in interaction with exposure levels, the type of noise and habituation.

During Continuous Descent Approaches (CDAs) aircraft glide towards the runway resulting in reduced noise and fuel usage. Here, we investigated whether such landings cause less noise annoyance than a regular stepwise approach. Both landing types were compared in a controlled laboratory setting with a Virtual Community Noise Simulator (VCNS), using four audio samples: an overflight during a regular approach (2000ft altitude) and three aircraft performing CDAs at respectively 3000, 4000 and 5000ft. The samples at 2000ft and 4000ft were recorded at a countryside road, a 360° photo of which was used for the virtual visuals. The other two CDA samples were derived from the recording at 4000ft. Participants were asked to rate all flyover samples twice while being immersed in the virtual environment. The CDA at 3000ft was rated as most annoying, likely due to a longer overflight duration, followed by the regular descent and then the CDAs at 4000 and 5000ft. As CDAs follow a fairly steady trajectory, it was estimated that they will increase annoyance within an area of approximately 2.5km2, as compared to regular landings. Outside of this area, CDAs may instead result in less annoyance than regular landings.

Aircraft noise is consistently rated as more annoying than noise from other sources with similar intensity. In three experiments, it was investigated whether this penalty is due to the source identity of the noise. In the first experiment, four samples were played to participants engaged in a working memory task: road traffic noise, an Airbus 320 flyover, and unidentifiable, transformed versions of these samples containing the same spectral content and envelope. Original, identifiable samples were rated as more annoying than the transformed samples. A second experiment tested whether these results were due to the absence of tonal components in the transformed samples. This was partly the case: an additional sample, created from the A320 flyover by filtering out major tonal components, was rated as less annoying than the original A320 sample, but as more annoying than the transformed sample. In a third experiment, participants either received full disclosure of the generation of the samples or no information to identify the transformed samples. The transformed sample was rated as most annoying when the A320 identity was disclosed, but as least annoying when it was not. Therefore, it was concluded that annoyance is influenced by both identifiability and the presence of tonal components.

Objective: The aim of this study was to test if performance of airline pilots, in performing an aerodynamic stall recovery procedure, decreases when they are surprised, compared to when they anticipate a stall event. Background: New flight-safety regulations for commercial aviation recommend the introduction of surprise and startle in upset prevention and recovery training. This calls for more evidence on the effects of surprise on pilot performance, as well as methods to effectively induce surprise in training simulators. Method: The study took place in a motion-base simulator with a post-stall aerodynamic model. Using a within-subjects design, the recovery performance of 20 pilots was tested in 2 conditions: 1 anticipated condition, and 1 surprise condition. In addition to flight parameters, subjective and physiological data relating to surprise and startle were measured. Results: Pilots had significantly more difficulties with adhering to the recovery procedure in the surprise condition compared to the anticipation condition. The subjective and physiological measures confirmed that the manipulation mainly increased surprise, and to a lesser extent also startle. Conclusion: The results suggest that pilots have more difficulty in managing an upset situation (i.e., an aerodynamic stall) when this situation is presented unexpectedly, underlining that upset prevention and recovery training should include elements of surprise.

Objective: A conceptual model is proposed in order to explain pilot performance in surprising and startling situations. Background: Today’s debate around loss of control following in-flight events and the implementation of upset prevention and recovery training has highlighted the importance of pilots’ ability to deal with unexpected events. Unexpected events, such as technical malfunctions or automation surprises, potentially induce a “startle factor” that may significantly impair performance. Method: Literature on surprise, startle, resilience, and decision making is reviewed, and findings are combined into a conceptual model. A number of recent flight incident and accident cases are then used to illustrate elements of the model. Results: Pilot perception and actions are conceptualized as being guided by “frames,” or mental knowledge structures that were previously learned. Performance issues in unexpected situations can often be traced back to insufficient adaptation of one’s frame to the situation. It is argued that such sensemaking or reframing processes are especially vulnerable to issues caused by startle or acute stress. Conclusion: Interventions should focus on (a) increasing the supply and quality of pilot frames (e.g., though practicing a variety of situations), (b) increasing pilot reframing skills (e.g., through the use of unpredictability in training scenarios), and (c) improving pilot metacognitive skills, so that inappropriate automatic responses to startle and surprise can be avoided. Application: The model can be used to explain pilot behavior in accident cases, to design experiments and training simulations, to teach pilots metacognitive skills, and to identify intervention methods.

Speech perception performance is one of the most widely used measures in audiology and auditory research. Nevertheless, our understanding of how speech is processed by the auditory system is limited. This is not only due to the subject—the complexity of the speech signal itself and the intricacy of disentangling target speech from interfering sounds—but also to the way it is approached: different aspects of speech perception are studied by largely separate research communities. Also when only early processing of speech is considered, excluding psycholinguistic aspects and effects of memory and learning, at least three relevant research fields can be discriminated: audibility and masking, auditory scene analysis, and attention. Although there is increasing interest in the crosslinks between these fields, approaches are still insufficiently integrated and important questions remain unanswered. Furthermore, modeling efforts are lagging behind and are only partly driven by advances in neurophysiological research. After reviewing progress in the three fields, a conceptual model will be presented that attempts to tie results together. Finally, knowledge gaps and open research issues will be highlighted.

Estimating cognitive or affective state from neurophysiological signals and designing applications that make use of this information requires expertise in many disciplines such as neurophysiology, machine learning, experimental psychology and human factors. This makes it difficult to perform research that is strong in all its aspects as well as to judge a study or application on its merits. On the occasion of the special topic ‘Using neurophysiological signals that reflect cognitive or affective state’ we here summarize often occurring pitfalls and recommendations on how to avoid them, both for authors (researchers) and readers. They relate to defining the state of interest, the neurophysiological processes that are expected to be involved in the state of interest, confounding factors, inadvertently ‘cheating’ with classification analyses, insight on what underlies successful state estimation, and finally, the added value of neurophysiological measures in the context of an application. We hope that this paper will support the community in producing high quality studies and well-validated, useful applications.

How do we recognize what one person is saying when others are speaking at the same time? This review summarizes widespread research in psychoacoustics, auditory scene analysis, and attention, all dealing with early processing and selection of speech, which has been stimulated by this question. Important effects occurring at the peripheral and brainstem levels are mutual masking of sounds and "unmasking" resulting from binaural listening. Psychoacoustic models have been developed that can predict these effects accurately, albeit using computational approaches rather than approximations of neural processing. Grouping—the segregation and streaming of sounds—represents a subsequent processing stage that interacts closely with attention. Sounds can be easily grouped—and subsequently selected—using primitive features such as spatial location and fundamental frequency. More complex processing is required when lexical, syntactic, or semantic information is used. Whereas it is now clear that such processing can take place preattentively, there also is evidence that the processing depth depends on the task-relevancy of the sound. This is consistent with the presence of a feedback loop in attentional control, triggering enhancement of to-be-selected input. Despite recent progress, there are still many unresolved issues: there is a need for integrative models that are neurophysiologically plausible, for research into grouping based on other than spatial or voice-related cues, for studies explicitly addressing endogenous and exogenous attention, for an explanation of the remarkable sluggishness of attention focused on dynamically changing sounds, and for research elucidating the distinction between binaural speech perception and sound localization.

In four experiments, we studied the time course of interference between detection of an oddball orientation target (OT) in an 8-item circular search display, and identification of a letter target (LT) in a central stream of distractor letters. Dual-task performance for different temporal lags between targets was compared to single-task performance. When the LT preceded the OT, dual-task performance levels were reduced at short inter-target intervals of 0 and 166 ms; when the OT preceded the LT, the dual-task interference was unexpectedly stronger and lasted for up to 500 ms. Resource competition due to temporally overlapping target processing cannot account for this result, because the feature search task is easier than the letter identification task, and therefore would have generated less interference when presented first. Two alternative explanations were explored. First, by manipulating the spatial inter-target distance, we investigated to what degree there is a penalty associated with directing the attentional window from a large object (the search display) to a smaller object (the central letter stream). Second, by varying the duration of the OT and subsequent mask, we studied whether the interference was caused by the difficulty of disengaging attention from the search display. Results support this second explanation and thus indicate that switching attention to the letter stream is hampered by the continuing presence of (masked) search display items. This result shows that attentional effects may play a major role in dual-task execution and can easily obscure interference due to other factors such as resource competition.