<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
  <channel>
    <title>Elizabeth Green on Test Science Research Document Library</title>
    <link>https://research.testscience.org/researchers/elizabeth-green/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Elizabeth Green on Test Science Research Document Library</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- 0.129.0</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Institute for Defense Analyses</copyright>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 01 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://research.testscience.org/researchers/elizabeth-green/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>Introduction to Measuring Situational Awareness in Mission-Based Testing Scenarios</title>
      <link>https://research.testscience.org/post/2023-introduction-to-measuring-situational-awareness-in-mission-based-testing-scenarios/</link>
      <pubDate>Sun, 01 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://research.testscience.org/post/2023-introduction-to-measuring-situational-awareness-in-mission-based-testing-scenarios/</guid>
      <description>Situation Awareness (SA) plays a key role in decision making and human performance, higher operator SA is associated with increased operator performance and decreased operator errors. While maintaining or improving “situational awareness” is a common requirement for systems under test, there is no single standardized method or metric for quantifying SA in operational testing (OT). This leads to varied and sometimes suboptimal treatments of SA measurement across programs and test events.</description>
      <content:encoded><![CDATA[

    
    <div style="position: relative; padding-bottom: 56.25%; height: 0; overflow: hidden;">
      <iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen" loading="eager" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/uqmjLsDA_EA?autoplay=0&controls=1&end=0&loop=0&mute=0&start=0" style="position: absolute; top: 0; left: 0; width: 100%; height: 100%; border:0;" title="YouTube video"
      ></iframe>
    </div>

<p>Situation Awareness (SA) plays a key role in decision making and human performance, higher operator SA is associated with increased operator performance and decreased operator errors. While maintaining or improving “situational awareness” is a common requirement for systems under test, there is no single standardized method or metric for quantifying SA in operational testing (OT). This leads to varied and sometimes suboptimal treatments of SA measurement across programs and test events. This paper introduces Endsley’s three-level model of SA in dynamic decision making, a frequently used model of individual SA, reviews trade-offs in some existing measures of SA, and discusses a selection of potential ways in which SA measurement during OT may be improved.</p>
<h4 id="suggested-citation">Suggested Citation</h4>
<blockquote>
<p>Green, Elizabeth, Miriam Armstrong, and Janna Mantua. “Scientific Measurement of Situation Awareness in Operational Testing.” The ITEA Journal of Test and Evaluation 44, no. 3 (October 2, 2023). <a href="https://doi.org/10.61278/itea.44.3.1002">https://doi.org/10.61278/itea.44.3.1002</a>.</p>
</blockquote>
<h4 id="slides">Slides:</h4>
<embed src= "slides.pdf" width= "100%" height= "700px" type="application/pdf" >

<h4 id="paper">Paper:</h4>
<embed src= "paper.pdf" width= "100%" height= "700px" type="application/pdf" >

]]></content:encoded>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
