Over a decade of UAV incidents: A human factors analysis of causal factors.

This analysis examined systemic causes of Uncrewed Air Vehicle (UAV) accidents identifying operator, environmental, supervisory, and organisational factors through the use of the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System (HFACS). HFACS is a system-based analysis method for investigating the causal factors associated with accidents and incidents and has previously been used to reliably and systematically identify active and latent failures associated with both military and general aviation accidents. Whilst HFACS has previously been applied to UAV accidents, the last known application was conducted in 2014. Using reports retrieved from nine accident investigation organisations' databases, causal factors were coded against unsafe acts, preconditions, and failures at the supervisory, organisational, and environmental levels. Causal factors were assessed on 77 medium or large UAV mishaps/accidents that occurred over a 12-year period up to 2024. 42 mishap reports were deemed to involve a human factor as a causal factor. A large proportion of the mishaps contained factors attributed to Decision Errors at level 1 (Unsafe Acts) which was found to be associated with both the Technological Environment and Adverse Mental State at level 2 (Pre-conditions). Causal factors were identified at each of the other 3 levels (Supervisory, Organisational and External) with a number of emergent associations between causal factors. These data provide support for the identification and development of interventions aimed at improving the safety of organisations and advice of regulators for Uncrewed Air Systems.

Resilient interactions between cyclists and drivers, and what does this mean for automated vehicles?

The road transport system is a complex sociotechnical system that relies on a number of formal and informal rules of the road to ensure safety and resilience. Interactions between vulnerable road users and drivers often includes informal communication channels that are tightly linked to social norms, user expectations and the environmental context. Automated vehicles have a challenge in being able to communicate and respond to these informal rules of the road, therefore additional technologies are required to better support vulnerable road users. This paper presents the informal rules that cyclists and drivers employ within a cyclist overtake manoeuvre, through qualitative data collected from focus groups and interviews with road users. These informal rules are classified into the key elements of resilience (monitor, detect, anticipate, respond and learn) to understand how they guide the resilient interactions between road users. Using a human factors approach, the Perceptual Cycle Model shows how information is communicated between different road users and created by the situational context. This is then used to inform how automation will alter the communication between cyclists and drivers, and what additional feedback mechanisms will be needed to support the systems resilience. Technologies that can support these feedback mechanisms are proposed as avenues for future development.

Resilience engineering on the road: Using operator event sequence diagrams and system failure analysis to enhance cyclist and vehicle interactions.

Future visions of transport systems include both a drive towards automated vehicles and the need for sustainable, active, modes of travel. The combination of these requirements needs careful consideration to ensure the integration of automated vehicles does not compromise vulnerable road users. Transport networks need to be resilient to automation integration, which requires foresight of possible challenges in their interaction with other road users. Focusing on a cyclist overtake scenario, the application of operator event sequence diagrams and a predictive systems failure method provide a novel way to analyse resilience. The approach offers the opportunity to review how automation can be positively integrated into road transportation to overcome the shortfalls of the current system by targeting organisational, procedural, equipment and training measures.

'It's a man's world': a gender-equitable scoping review of gender, transportation, and work.

The deeply embedded inequalities in gender which mark most contemporary societies have led to a world shaped by male perspectives. This world fails to accommodate adequately the needs and experiences of women: no more evident than in the transport sector, where a 'default male' perspective dominates the planning and policies that shape our roads, railways, airlines, and shipping. This paper argues that the ways in which masculinity infuses transport systems mean they are integral to debates on gender and work. They impact both the way women experience travel and their access to places of work. A multi-transport domain scoping study has been conducted to review the literature for key gender factors that influence the use of road, rail, aviation, and maritime transport modes. A multi-disciplinary approach is proposed which incorporates perspectives and methods from the social sciences that can help to foster Gender-Equitable Human Factors (GE-HF).Practitioner summary: This paper seeks to identify the gender issues related to transport and work. A scoping review provides key factors that detail how women are disadvantaged by current transport systems. It presents gaps in knowledge that future research needs to fill. Women must be included in key decisions within the transport sector.

25 Years of road safety: The journey from thinking humans to systems-thinking.

Research into road safety has evolved from individual level component analysis to a much broader, systemic approach that acknowledges the fusion of 'socio' and 'technical' system elements. Over the past four decades, Professor Neville Stanton has contributed to over 179 journal articles, book chapters and conference papers in the field of road safety. The journey from 'thinking humans' to 'systems thinking' is demonstrated in this paper through the novel application of the Risk Management Framework (RMF) to the categorisation of research activities. A systematic review of Neville's contributions to the field of road safety demonstrates that over the years, his research activities have evolved from investigating single technological or human performance aspects in isolation (e.g., in-vehicle information design and workload) through to the holistic analysis of much broader systems (e.g., investigating road safety as a whole). Importantly, this evolution goes hand in hand with a change in the focus and emphasis of recommendations for improvements to safety. Going forward, Neville has helped pave the way for fundamental changes and improvements to be made to road safety systems around the world.

Predicting Design-Induced Error on the Flight Deck : An Aircraft Engine Oil Leak Scenario.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the types of errors that commercial pilots may make when trying to resolve a suspected engine oil leak using the interfaces currently available. BACKGROUND: The decisions that pilots make often have to be made quickly and under time pressure, with the emphasis on avoiding critical situations from arising. To make the correct decisions, it is vital that pilots have accurate and up-to-date information available. However, interaction with flight deck interfaces may lead to error if they are not effectively designed. METHOD: A hierarchical task analysis was conducted using evidence from pilot interview data to understand the pilots' typical response to a suspected engine oil leak scenario. This was used as the primary input into the Systematic Human Error Reduction and Prediction Approach (SHERPA). RESULTS: A total of 108 possible errors were identified. The most common error type was a retrieval error, in which flight crews may retrieve the wrong information about the engine. A number of remedial measures are proposed to try and overcome such issues. CONCLUSION: This analysis provides an initial starting point for identifying potential future design ideas that can assist the pilots in dealing with oil leaks. APPLICATION: This work has identified the value of applying human error identification methodologies to the assessment of current flight deck processes surrounding engine oil leaks. The method presented permits the operational analysis of possible errors on the flight deck and facilitates the proposition of remedial measures to implement technological innovations that can mitigate error.

Future technology on the flight deck: assessing the use of touchscreens in vibration environments.

Use of touchscreens in the flight deck has been steadily increasing, however, their usability may be severely impacted when turbulent conditions arise. Most previous research focusses on using touchscreens in static conditions; therefore, this study assessed touchscreen use whilst undergoing turbulent representative motion, generated using a 6-axis motion simulator. Touchscreens were tested in centre, side and overhead positions, to investigate how turbulence affected: (1) error rate, movement times and accuracy, (2) arm fatigue and discomfort. Two touchscreen technologies were compared: a 15" infra-red and a 17.3" projected capacitive touchscreen with force sensing capability. The potential of the force sensing capability to minimise unintentional interactions was also investigated. Twenty-six participants undertook multi-direction tapping (ISO 9241; ISO 2010 ) and gesture tasks, under four vibration conditions (control, light chop, light turbulence and moderate turbulence). Error rate, movement time and workload increased and usability decreased significantly, with screen position and increasing turbulence level. Practitioner Summary: This study evaluated the use of infra-red and projected capacitive touchscreen technologies using multi-directional tapping and gesture tasks, whilst being subjected to different levels of turbulence representative motion. Performance degraded significantly with increasing turbulence level and touchscreen location. This has implications for future flight deck design.

Creating the environment for driver distraction: A thematic framework of sociotechnical factors.

As modern society becomes more reliant on technology, its use within the vehicle is becoming a concern for road safety due to both portable and built-in devices offering sources of distraction. While the effects of distracting technologies are well documented, little is known about the causal factors that lead to the drivers' engagement with technological devices. The relevance of the sociotechnical system within which the behaviour occurs requires further research. This paper presents two experiments, the first aims to assess the drivers self-reported decision to engage with technological tasks while driving and their reasoning for doing so with respect to the wider sociotechnical system. This utilised a semi-structured interview method, conducted with 30 drivers to initiate a discussion on their likelihood of engaging with 22 different tasks across 7 different road types. Inductive thematic analysis provided a hierarchical thematic framework that detailed the self-reported causal factors that influence the drivers' use of technology whilst driving. The second experiment assessed the relevance of the hierarchical framework to a model of distraction that was established from within the literature on the drivers use of distracting technologies while driving. The findings provide validation for some relationships studied in the literature, as well as providing insights into relationships that require further study. The role of the sociotechnical system in the engagement of distractions while driving is highlighted, with the causal factors reported by drivers suggesting the importance of considering the wider system within which the behaviour is occurring and how it may be creating the conditions for distraction to occur. This supports previous claims made within the literature based model. Recommendations are proposed that encourage a movement away from individual focused countermeasures towards systemic actors.

What technologies do people engage with while driving and why?

This paper presents the findings of a semi-structured interview study that was conducted to identify drivers' self-reported likelihood of engaging with technologies that are now commonly found in modern automobiles. Previous research has focused on the effect these technological tasks have on driving performance, but there has been less focus on how, why and when drivers choose to engage with them. As distraction remains a significant contributor to road accidents, an understanding of why it occurs will give important insights into how it can be prevented. A semi-structured interview schedule was developed to allow drivers to discuss the factors that influence their decision to engage with a variety of different technologies. The methodology facilitated both quantitative ratings of the drivers' likelihood of engaging in a variety of tasks and qualitative insights into why. Age and gender had some influence on the propensity to engage, in line with other findings in the literature, as did road type and task type. The reasons drivers gave for why they engage with potentially distracting tasks inform recommendations for preventing distraction related accidents from the increasingly prevalent sources of technologies available to drivers.

What's the law got to do with it? Legislation regarding in-vehicle technology use and its impact on driver distraction.

Legislation in the road transport domain aims to control safety on the roads. Despite this, a critical issue affecting road safety is that of driver distraction. Although poorly defined, distraction is a significant road safety issue which, in part, is caused by the prevalence of technology within vehicles. Legislation surrounding the use of in-vehicle technologies are explored in this paper from a socio-technical system perspective. This reveals the wider context of the road transport system operating under the current laws using an Accimap analysis. A distinction in the law between the use of hand-held mobile phones, a device that is typically banned for use by drivers worldwide, and the use of other technological devices that are covered by more general laws against 'careless' and/or 'dangerous' driving was found. Historically, individual drivers' have been blamed for distraction, whereas the systems approach shows how current legislation may have created the conditions necessary for driver distraction.