Relationships Between Pilots' Startle and Surprise Responses and Information-Processing Performance During Simulated In-Flight Events.

IF 3.6 3区 心理学 Q1 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Human Factors Pub Date : 2026-08-01 Epub Date: 2026-03-25 DOI:10.1177/00187208261434426
Jiayu Chen, Annemarie Landman, Alexis Derumigny, Olaf Stroosma, M M René van Paassen, Max Mulder
{"title":"Relationships Between Pilots' Startle and Surprise Responses and Information-Processing Performance During Simulated In-Flight Events.","authors":"Jiayu Chen, Annemarie Landman, Alexis Derumigny, Olaf Stroosma, M M René van Paassen, Max Mulder","doi":"10.1177/00187208261434426","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>ObjectiveWe aim to investigate how pilots' startle and surprise responses affect information-processing performance during simulated in-flight events.BackgroundStartle and surprise are distinct constructs, each with their own potential effects on pilot's performance during unexpected in-flight events. Prior research suggests that startle may impair performance through stress-induced cognitive interference, whereas surprise may do so via cognitive demands associated with sensemaking. Thus, we hypothesized that both startle and surprise would negatively affect information-processing performance on a secondary auditory cognitive task.MethodUsing a motion-based hexapod simulator and a twin-propeller aircraft model, 26 pilots each performed eight single-pilot flight scenarios, which were designed to elicit varying levels of startle and surprise responses. Linear mixed-effects models were employed to analyse the relationships between self-report startle and surprise with secondary task performance, while controlling for individual differences and differences between the scenarios.ResultsThe results revealed that higher startle was significantly associated with reduced information-processing speed. For surprise, no significant association was found.ConclusionThe findings suggest that, within the context of the tested scenarios, startle appeared to impose a more pronounced disruptive effect on pilots' information-processing performance than surprise.ApplicationThe study underscores the need for tailored interventions to enhance pilots' resilience to startle and calls for further research on ecologically valid methods to induce surprise for research and training purposes.</p>","PeriodicalId":56333,"journal":{"name":"Human Factors","volume":" ","pages":"1010-1032"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13260751/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Factors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208261434426","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ObjectiveWe aim to investigate how pilots' startle and surprise responses affect information-processing performance during simulated in-flight events.BackgroundStartle and surprise are distinct constructs, each with their own potential effects on pilot's performance during unexpected in-flight events. Prior research suggests that startle may impair performance through stress-induced cognitive interference, whereas surprise may do so via cognitive demands associated with sensemaking. Thus, we hypothesized that both startle and surprise would negatively affect information-processing performance on a secondary auditory cognitive task.MethodUsing a motion-based hexapod simulator and a twin-propeller aircraft model, 26 pilots each performed eight single-pilot flight scenarios, which were designed to elicit varying levels of startle and surprise responses. Linear mixed-effects models were employed to analyse the relationships between self-report startle and surprise with secondary task performance, while controlling for individual differences and differences between the scenarios.ResultsThe results revealed that higher startle was significantly associated with reduced information-processing speed. For surprise, no significant association was found.ConclusionThe findings suggest that, within the context of the tested scenarios, startle appeared to impose a more pronounced disruptive effect on pilots' information-processing performance than surprise.ApplicationThe study underscores the need for tailored interventions to enhance pilots' resilience to startle and calls for further research on ecologically valid methods to induce surprise for research and training purposes.

模拟飞行事件中飞行员惊吓和意外反应与信息处理性能的关系
目的研究飞行员在模拟飞行过程中的惊吓和意外反应对信息处理能力的影响。惊吓和惊讶是不同的概念,在飞行中遇到意外事件时,每一种都会对飞行员的表现产生潜在影响。先前的研究表明,惊吓可能通过压力引起的认知干扰来损害表现,而惊讶可能通过与语义相关的认知需求来损害表现。因此,我们假设惊吓和惊讶都会对二级听觉认知任务的信息处理表现产生负面影响。方法使用基于运动的六足模拟器和双螺旋桨飞机模型,26名飞行员分别进行了8个单飞行员飞行场景,旨在引起不同程度的惊吓和惊讶反应。采用线性混合效应模型,在控制个体差异和情景差异的基础上,分析自我报告惊吓和惊讶与次要任务绩效的关系。结果惊吓程度越高,信息处理速度越慢。令人惊讶的是,没有发现显著的关联。研究结果表明,在测试场景的背景下,惊吓对飞行员信息处理性能的破坏性影响似乎比惊喜更明显。该研究强调需要量身定制的干预措施,以增强飞行员对惊吓的适应能力,并呼吁进一步研究生态有效的方法,以诱导研究和训练目的的惊讶。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Human Factors
Human Factors 管理科学-行为科学
CiteScore
10.60
自引率
6.10%
发文量
99
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society publishes peer-reviewed scientific studies in human factors/ergonomics that present theoretical and practical advances concerning the relationship between people and technologies, tools, environments, and systems. Papers published in Human Factors leverage fundamental knowledge of human capabilities and limitations – and the basic understanding of cognitive, physical, behavioral, physiological, social, developmental, affective, and motivational aspects of human performance – to yield design principles; enhance training, selection, and communication; and ultimately improve human-system interfaces and sociotechnical systems that lead to safer and more effective outcomes.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书