The Validity of Situation Awareness for Performance: A Meta-Analysis
SA is a widely used cognitive construct in human factors, summarized as “knowing what is going on.” Generally, SA is theoretically posited to be a critical causal factor and/or construct for performance. However, some researchers have raised concerns that SA may be circular and also that SA may lack the appropriate psychological mechanisms relevant to performance. We address these conflicting perspectives using meta-analysis to evaluate the specific and general patterns of associations among SA-performance effect sizes. Specifically, we focus on the validity of SA for performance—the degree to which SA represents or captures the relevant psychological processes and mechanisms related to task performance. From the empirical literature, we coded associations of eight unique measures of SA with (task) performance: 492 effects from 38 papers met the systematic review inclusion criteria. In contrast to SA’s broadly theorized fundamental link with performance, the magnitude of most meta-analytic mean effect sizes for SA measures was limited to medium or lower effects. Although there was a significant overall mean effect, its magnitude was also limited (r = 0.24). In addition, there was high unexplained systematic variation with an enormous plausible range for individual effects (r = -0.20 to 0.60). The meta-analytic results are inconsistent with theories postulating SA is fundamental to performance. Instead, SA’s validity for performance tends to be, on average, weak with large variations among effects. Therefore, theories may need to be revised. Furthermore, even presuming SA is causally linked to performance as generally theorized, improvements in SA (such as SA-based design and training) may not correspond to meaningful increases in task performance.