Human Factors in Model Interpretability

Abstract. The Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS) methodology was applied to accident reports from three African countries: Kenya, Nigeria, and South Africa. In all, 55 of 72 finalized reports for accidents occurring between 2000 and 2014 were analyzed. In most of the accidents, one or more human factors contributed to the accident. Skill-based errors (56.4%), the physical environment (36.4%), and violations (20%) were the most common causal factors in the accidents. Decision errors comprised 18.2%, while perceptual errors and crew resource management accounted for 10.9%. The results were consistent with previous industry observations: Over 70% of aviation accidents have human factor causes. Adverse weather was seen to be a common secondary casual factor. Changes in flight training and risk management methods may alleviate the high number of accidents in Africa.

Download Full-text

Aviation Human Factors Related Industry News

Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors ◽

10.1027/2192-0923/a000088 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 5 (2) ◽

pp. 136-138

Keyword(s):

Human Factors

Download Full-text

Asiana Airlines Flight 214

Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors ◽

10.1027/2192-0923/a000066 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 4 (2) ◽

pp. 113-121 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Stephanie Chow ◽

Stephen Yortsos ◽

Najmedin Meshkati

Keyword(s):

Human Factors ◽

Aviation Safety ◽

Cultural Factors ◽

Vital Role ◽

Cultural Issues ◽

Flight Crew ◽

Pilot Performance ◽

Engineering Designs ◽

Flight Deck

This article focuses on a major human factors–related issue that includes the undeniable role of cultural factors and cockpit automation and their serious impact on flight crew performance, communication, and aviation safety. The report concentrates on the flight crew performance of the Boeing 777–Asiana Airlines Flight 214 accident, by exploring issues concerning mode confusion and autothrottle systems. It also further reviews the vital role of cultural factors in aviation safety and provides a brief overview of past, related accidents. Automation progressions have been created in an attempt to design an error-free flight deck. However, to do that, the pilot must still thoroughly understand every component of the flight deck – most importantly, the automation. Otherwise, if pilots are not completely competent in terms of their automation, the slightest errors can lead to fatal accidents. As seen in the case of Asiana Flight 214, even though engineering designs and pilot training have greatly evolved over the years, there are many cultural, design, and communication factors that affect pilot performance. It is concluded that aviation systems designers, in cooperation with pilots and regulatory bodies, should lead the strategic effort of systematically addressing the serious issues of cockpit automation, human factors, and cultural issues, including their interactions, which will certainly lead to better solutions for safer flights.

Download Full-text