Engineering topics

Barshi, Immanuel

Publications and source records attributed to Barshi, Immanuel.

At least 19 records

NASA NTRS2020

Effects of Long-Duration Space Flight on Training Retention and Transfer

The space environment imposes on the astronaut crew significant physiological, psycho-social, and cognitive loads that can not be replicated on the ground. These loads likely impact crew performance. To date, no systematic data collection has taken place to understand the effects of such loads on crew members ability to retain trained knowledge and skills, and to transfer such knowledge and skills to novel situations. The research described here was originally requested by HRP management to be the first such study to systematically collect data on the effects of long duration space flight on training retention and transfer. Because current theories of retention and transfer are based on results obtained in university laboratories using undergraduate students as research participants, and because crew time in space is very expensive, this study was designed to compare the performance of 4 groups of subjects: crew members in space, crew members on the ground, crew-like subjects, and university undergraduate students. Results from the ground-phase of the study reported here demonstrate that crew members performance under cognitive load can not be predicted from the performance of university undergraduate students. It is still an open question the extent to which crew members cognitive performance in space can be predicted from the performance of crew members on the ground.

Barshi, Immanuel↗

NASA NTRS2020

Towards Crew-Centered, Mission-Oriented Space Flight Training

This poster describes a training approach that applies empirically derived principles of training to reimagining the overall design of NASA's space flight training program. The poster is focused specifically on the design of astronaut training for NASA's future deep space, exploration missions to Mars. We briefly describe NASA's space flight training practices during the Apollo and Space Shuttle eras as well as NASA's current practices for training astronauts for their missions to the International Space Station. We provide an overview of NASA's current concepts for a mission to Mars to scope our training approach. We envision a new space flight training approach which we term crew-centered, mission oriented training, inspired by the design approach offered in the context of airline pilot training by Barshi. We apply research-based training principles reviewed by Kole and his colleagues, as well as by other researchers in training science, into real-world, practical guidelines for the particular context of training astronauts for a mission to Mars.

Dempsey, Donna L.↗

NASA NTRS2019

Training, Retention, and Transfer of Data Entry Perceptual and Motor Processes Over Short and Long Retention Intervals

In 2 experiments, subjects trained in a standard data entry task, which involved typing numbers (e.g., 2147) using their right hands. At an initial test (20 min or 6 months after training), subjects completed the standard task, followed by a left-hand variant (typing with their left hands) that involved the same perceptual, but different motoric, processes as the standard task. At a second test (2 days or 8 months after training), subjects completed the standard task, followed by a code variant (translating letters into digits, then typing the digits with their right hands) that involved different perceptual, but the same motoric, processes as the standard task. At test, for each of the three tasks, half the trials were trained numbers (old) and half were new. Repetition priming (faster response times to old than new numbers) was found for each task, with extended delays only slightly decreasing the magnitude of the effect. Repetition priming for the standard task reflects retention of trained numbers, for the left-hand variant reflects transfer of perceptual processes, and for the code variant reflects transfer of motoric processes. There was, thus, evidence for both specificity and generalizability of training data entry perceptual and motoric processes even over very long retention intervals.

transfer↗

NASA NTRS2019

The Comprehensive LOFT

The training of pilots at major US air carriers has changed little over the years. These courses often begin in learning each and every sub-system of the particular airplane to be flown. The training course culminates in a series of training sessions in a full-motion, full-mission flight simulator. Most US airlines now incorporate one final simulator training session known as LOFT, Line Oriented Flight Training, where rather than going through a series of disconnected, isolated, flight maneuvers, the session is conducted as a flight from a departure airport to a destination airport. Flying for an Air Line, one is a Line Pilot, flying the "line." And so the LOFT session in the simulator is supposed to represent the reality of line operations and thus prepare the trainee to fly the line. But if the ultimate goal of the training is to produce a pilot who is ready to safely and efficiently fly the line, shouldn't all training be "line oriented"? This paper describes an approach to structuring airline flight training such that all training is "line oriented." This approach represents an opportunity to translate many of the training principles offered by Healy and her colleagues into training specifications.

Training Principles↗

NASA NTRS2018

The Story of Multitasking

Multitasking is endemic in modern life and work: drivers talk on cell phones, office workers type while answering phone calls, students do homework while text messaging...but, nurses also prepare injections while responding to doctor's calls, and air traffic controllers direct aircraft in one sector while handling aircraft additional traffic in another. Whether in daily life or at work, we are constantly bombarded with multiple, concurrent interruptions and demands and we have all somehow come to believe in the myth that we can, and in fact are expected to, easily address them all - without any repercussions. Accumulating However, accumulating scientific evidence is now suggesting that multitasking increases the probability of human error. This talk presents a set of NASA studies that characterize concurrent demands in one work domain, routine airline cockpit operations, in order to illustrate the ways operational task demands together with the natural proclivity to manage them all concurrently make human performance in this and in any work domain vulnerable to potentially serious errors and to accidents.

Barshi, Immanuel↗

NASA NTRS2018

Human-Centered Operations

Efforts to improve operational safety often focus on preventing human error. But humans don't just make mistakes. They do, in fact, make a tremendous contribution to operational safety, and there is much to learn from what goes right. To support people in their role, the operation should be human-centered. To make the operation human-centered, the framework of the 4Ps can be used to create a clear, coherent, consistent and comprehensive guidance.

flight safety↗

NASA NTRS2018

Applying Research-Based Training Principles: Towards Crew-Centered, Mission-Oriented Space Flight Training

This chapter describes a training approach that applies empirically derived principles of training to re-imagining the overall design of NASA’s space flight training program. The chapter is focused specifically on the design of astronaut training for NASA’s future deep space, exploration missions to Mars. We briefly describe NASA’s space flight training practices during the Apollo and Space Shuttle eras as well as NASA’s current practices for training astronauts for their missions to the International Space Station. We provide an overview of NASA’s current concepts for a mission to Mars to scope our training approach. We envision a new space flight training approach which we term “crew-centered, mission oriented” training, inspired by the design approach offered in the context of airline pilot training by Barshi (2015). We apply some of the training principles reviewed by Kole and his colleagues in the companion volume (Kole, Healy, Schneider & Barshi, 2019), as well as by other researchers in training science (e.g., Ericsson, Krampe, & Tesch-Römer, 1993; Healy & Bourne, 2012; Salas, Wilson, Priest and Guthrie, 2006), into real-world, practical guidelines for the particular context of training astronauts for a mission to Mars.processes over very long retention intervals.

Training↗

NASA NTRS2018

Training for Mars

Spaceflight training for Apollo era and Space Shuttle missions was designed to train crew on specific tasks for their short duration missions. The training mottos included "practice, practice, practice" and "hammering it in." However, training for longer duration ISS (International Space Station) missions has been more challenging. There is clear documentation that tasks and skills trained pre-flight are not all retained throughout the mission, and this lack of training retention is augmented with real-time ground support. NASA does not currently have a training design that supports semi-autonomous to autonomous mission operations. The current design of a manned Mars mission calls for a 32-month long mission and asynchronous communication involving long delays.

Barshi, Immanuel↗

NASA NTRS2018

ISS Training Best Practices and Lessons Learned

Training our crew members for long-duration Deep Space Transport (DST) missions will have to be qualitatively and quantitatively different from current training practices. However, there is much to be learned from the extensive experience NASA has gained in training crew members for missions on board the International Space Station (ISS). Furthermore, the operational experience on board the ISS provides valuable feedback concerning training effectiveness. Keeping in mind the vast differences between current ISS crew training and training for DST missions, the needs of future crew members, and the demands of future missions, this ongoing study seeks to document current training practices and lessons learned. The goal of the study is to provide input to the design of future crew training that takes as much advantage as possible of what has already been learned and avoids as much as possible past inefficiencies. Results from this study will be presented upon its completion. By researching established training principles, examining future needs, and by using current practices in spaceflight training as test beds, this research project is mitigating program risks and generating templates and requirements to meet future training needs.

training↗

NASA NTRS2018

The Effects of Long-Duration Spaceflight on Training Retention and Transfer

Training our crew members for long duration, exploration-class missions will have to maximize long-term retention and transfer of the trained skills. The expected duration of the missions, our inability to predict all the possible tasks the crew will be called upon to perform, and the low training-to-mission time ratio require that the training be maximally effective such that the skills acquired during training will be retained and will be transferrable across a wide range of specific tasks that are different from the particular tasks used during training. However, to be able to design training that can achieve these ambitious goals, we must first understand the ways in which long-duration spaceflight affects training retention and transfer. Current theories of training retention and transfer are largely based on experimental studies conducted at university laboratories using undergraduate students as participants. Furthermore, all such studies have been conducted on Earth. We do not know how well the results of these studies predict the performance of crew members. More specifically, we do not know how well the results of these studies predict the performance of crew members in space and especially during long-duration missions. To address this gap in our knowledge, the current on-going study seeks to test the null hypothesis that performance of university undergraduate students on Earth on training retention and transfer tests do in fact predict accurately the performance of crew members during long-duration spaceflights. To test this hypothesis, the study employs a single 16-month long experimental protocol with 3 different participant groups: undergraduate university students, crew members on the ground, and crew members in space. Results from this study will be presented upon its completion. This poster presents results of study trials of the two tasks used in this study: a data entry task and a mapping task. By researching established training principles, by examining future needs, and by using current practices in spaceflight training as test beds, this research project is mitigating program risks and generating templates and requirements to meet future training needs.

training↗

NASA NTRS2017

How Much is Remembered as a Function of Presentation Modality?

According to a widespread claim often used for teaching recommendations, students remember 10 percent of what they read, 20 percent of what they hear, 30 percent of what they see, and 50 percent of what they see and hear. Clearly, the percentages cannot be correct, and there is no empirical evidence even for the ordering. To investigate the ordering, we used a laboratory paradigm that has already revealed some findings regarding the ordering of modalities for remembering information. In this paradigm, subjects are given messages instructing them to move in a grid of four stacked matrices by clicking a computer mouse. The current experiment compared 3 modalities presented either once, see (visual arrows), hear (auditory words), read (visual words); twice in succession, see see, hear hear, read read; or in two different successive modalities, see hear, hear see, see read, read see, hear read, read hear. We found better performance for messages presented twice than for those presented once, regardless of modality. For the twice-presented messages performance varied as a function of the second modality, with best performance for see and worst for read.

information↗

NASA NTRS2017

Training, Retention, and Transfer of Data Entry Perceptual and Motoric Processes Over Long Retention Intervals

Subjects trained in a standard data entry task, which involved typing numbers (e.g., 5421) using their right hands. At test (6 months post-training), subjects completed the standard task, followed by a left-hand variant (typing with their left hands) that involved the same perceptual, but different motoric, processes as the standard task. At a second test (8 months post-training), subjects completed the standard task, followed by a code variant (translating letters into digits, then typing the digits with their right hands) that involved different perceptual, but the same motoric, processes as the standard task. For each of the three tasks, half the trials were trained numbers (old) and half were new. Repetition priming (faster response times to old than new numbers) was found for each task. Repetition priming for the standard task reflects retention of trained numbers; for the left-hand variant reflects transfer of perceptual processes; and for the code variant reflects transfer of motoric processes. There was thus evidence for both specificity and generalizability of training data entry perceptual and motoric processes over very long retention intervals.

dat↗

NASA NTRS2017

Designing Flightdeck Procedures: Literature Resources

This technical publication contains the titles, abstracts, summaries, descriptions, and/or annotations of available literature sources on procedure design and development, requirements, and guidance. It is designed to provide users with an easy access to available resources on the topic of procedure design, and with a sense of the contents of these sources. This repository of information is organized into the following publication sources: Research (e.g., journal articles, conference proceedings), Manufacturers' (e.g., operation manuals, newsletters), and Regulatory and/or Government (e.g., advisory circulars, reports). An additional section contains synopses of Accident/Incident Reports involving procedures. This work directly supports a comprehensive memorandum by Barshi, Mauro, Degani, & Loukopoulou (2016) that summarizes the results of a multi-year project, partially funded by the FAA, to develop technical reference materials that support guidance on the process of developing cockpit procedures (see "Designing Flightdeck Procedures" https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20160013263.pdf). An extensive treatment of this topic is presented in a forthcoming book by the same authors.

flightdeck↗

NASA NTRS2017

The Effects of Long-Duration Spaceflight on Training Retention and Transfer

ISS↗

NASA NTRS2017

ISS Training Best Practices and Lessons Learned

Training our crew members for long duration exploration-class missions (LDEM) will have to be qualitatively and quantitatively different from current training practices. However, there is much to be learned from the extensive experience NASA has gained in training crew members for missions on board the International Space Station (ISS). Furthermore, the operational experience on board the ISS provides valuable feedback concerning training effectiveness. Keeping in mind the vast differences between current ISS crew training and training for LDEM, the needs of future crew members, and the demands of future missions, this ongoing study seeks to document current training practices and lessons learned. The goal of the study is to provide input to the design of future crew training that takes as much advantage as possible of what has already been learned and avoids as much as possible past inefficiencies. Results from this study will be presented upon its completion. By researching established training principles, examining future needs, and by using current practices in spaceflight training as test beds, this research project is mitigating program risks and generating templates and requirements to meet future training needs.

ISS↗

NASA NTRS2016

Designing Flightdeck Procedures

The primary goal of this document is to provide guidance on how to design, implement, and evaluate flight deck procedures. It provides a process for developing procedures that meet clear and specific requirements. This document provides a brief overview of: 1) the requirements for procedures, 2) a process for the design of procedures, and 3) a process for the design of checklists. The brief overview is followed by amplified procedures that follow the above steps and provide details for the proper design, implementation and evaluation of good flight deck procedures and checklists.

checklists↗

NASA NTRS2016

The Human Factors of an Early Space Accident: Flight 3-65 of the X-15

The X-15 was a critical research vehicle in the early days of space flight. On November 15, 1967, the X-15-3 suffered an in-flight breakup. This 191st flight of the X-15 and the 65th flight of this third configuration was the only fatal accident of the X-15 program. This paper presents an analysis, from a human factors perspective, of the events that led up to the accident. The analysis is based on the information contained in the report of the Air Force-NASA Accident Investigation Board (AIB) dated January, 1968. The AIBs analysis addressed, primarily, the events that occurred subsequent to the pilot's taking direct control of the reaction control system. The analysis described here suggests that, rather than events following the pilot's switch to direct control, it was the events preceding the switch that led to the accident. Consequently, the analyses and conclusions regarding the causal factors of, and the contributing factors to, the loss of Flight 3-65 presented here differ from those of the AIB based on the same evidence. Although the accident occurred in 1967, the results of the presented analysis are still relevant today. We present our analysis and discuss its implications for the safety of space operations.

X-15↗

NASA NTRS2016

Risk

Speaking up, i.e. expressing ones concerns, is a critical piece of effective communication. Yet, we see many situations in which crew members have concerns and still remain silent. Why would that be the case? And how can we assess the risks of speaking up vs. the risks of keeping silent? And once we do make up our minds to speak up, how should we go about it? Our workshop aims to answer these questions, and to provide us all with practical tools for effective risk assessment and effective speaking-up strategies..

speaking up↗