Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorA. Stanton, Nevilleen_US
dc.contributor.authorHarris, Donen_US
dc.contributor.authorM. Salmon, Paulen_US
dc.contributor.authorDemagalski, Jasonen_US
dc.contributor.authorMarshall, Andrewen_US
dc.contributor.authorWaldmann, Thomasen_US
dc.contributor.authorDekker, Sidneyen_US
dc.contributor.authorS. Young, Marken_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-04-24T08:11:32Z
dc.date.available2017-04-24T08:11:32Z
dc.date.issued2010en_US
dc.date.modified2013-05-31T00:38:17Z
dc.identifier.issn19907710en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/36412
dc.description.abstractThis paper describes the Human Error Identification (HEI) Technique called the Human Error Template (HET). HET has been developed specifically for the aerospace industry in response to Certification Specification (CS) 25.1302. In particular, it is intended as an aid for the early identification of design-induced errors, and as a formal method to demonstrate the inclusion of human factors issues in the design and certification process of aircraft flight-decks, including supplemental type certification. The template-based approach was chosen because it appeared to be quick to learn and easy to use. HET uses a hierarchical task analysis as its starting point. A checklist of twelve (12) external error modes is used to determine which might lead to credible errors for each task step. For each credible error a description is given and the outcome described. If the likelihood of the error and the consequences are both high then that task step is rated as a 'Fail'. The error mode taxonomy developed comprises: fail to execute a task, task execution incomplete, in the wrong direction, wrong task executed, task repeated, on the wrong interface element, too early, too late, too much, too little, misread information, and other. HET was then compared to SHERPA, HAZOP and HEIST. Thirty seven (37) analysts were employed in this study based on a landing scenario. HET showed significantly better Sensitivity Index scores than any of the other methods, and the greatest number of correct error predictions (hits). The results from the HET validation study demonstrate that HET meets all the criteria set. It is easy to learn, the error taxonomy has been specifically designed for flight-deck tasks, it is auditable, and it has been proved to be both reliable and valid. HET is recommended for use in the design, evaluation and certification of aircraft flight-decks.en_US
dc.description.peerreviewedYesen_US
dc.description.publicationstatusYesen_US
dc.languageEnglishen_US
dc.language.isoen_US
dc.publisherZhongguo Hangkong Taikong Xuehuien_US
dc.publisher.placeTaiwanen_US
dc.publisher.urihttp://aspers.airiti.com/JoAAA/WebHome.aspxen_US
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationNen_US
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom1en_US
dc.relation.ispartofpageto10en_US
dc.relation.ispartofissue1en_US
dc.relation.ispartofjournalJournal of Aeronautics, Astronautics and Aviationen_US
dc.relation.ispartofvolume42en_US
dc.rights.retentionYen_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPhysical Sciences not elsewhere classifieden_US
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode029999en_US
dc.titlePredicting Design-Induced Error in the Cockpiten_US
dc.typeJournal articleen_US
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Peer Reviewed (HERDC)en_US
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articlesen_US
gro.rights.copyrightSelf-archiving of the author-manuscript version is not yet supported by this journal. Please refer to the journal link for access to the definitive, published version or contact the authors for more information.en_US
gro.date.issued2010
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record