Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T13:48:56.716Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Experimental study on the effects of a single simulator-based bridge resource management unit on attitudes, behaviour and performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 May 2021

Stefan Röttger Open the ORCID record for Stefan Röttger [Opens in a new window]  and
Hannes Krey
Stefan Röttger*
Affiliation:
Department of Naval Psychology and Ergonomics, Naval Institute of Maritime Medicine, Kronshagen, Germany
Hannes Krey
Affiliation:
Department of Naval Psychology and Ergonomics, Naval Institute of Maritime Medicine, Kronshagen, Germany
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The objective of this work was to assess whether the implementation of a bridge resource management (BRM) unit into the simulator-based nautical training of the German Navy is effective in improving non-technical skills and navigation performance. To this end, questionnaire data, observations of behaviour and performance outcomes were compared between a control group and an experimental group. Data of 24 bridge teams (126 sailors) were used for the analyses. Ten teams received BRM training and 14 teams served as the control group with unchanged simulator training. Reactions to simulator training were positive in both groups but more favourable in the control group. In the BRM group, significantly more positive attitudes towards open communication and coordination, more frequent sharing of information and fewer collisions were found than in the control group. Effect sizes were rather small. This may be due to the limited scale of the BRM unit, which consisted of only one instruction-training-feedback cycle. The extension of BRM-related feedback to all simulator runs of the nautical training can be expected to produce larger effects on attitudes, behaviour and performance.

Keywords

bridge resource managementsimulator trainingtraining effectivenessexperimental study
Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Navigation , Volume 74 , Issue 5 , September 2021 , pp. 1127 - 1141
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of The Royal Institute of Navigation

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alliger, G. M., Tannenbaum, S. I., Bennett, W. Jr, Traver, H. and Shotland, A. (1997). A meta-analysis of the relations among training criteria. Personnel Psychology, 50(2), 341–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barić, M., Čulin, J. and Bielić, T. (2018). Problems that occur in a team: Learning from maritime accidents via simulation training. TransNav: International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 12(4), 709–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bolstad, M. (2018). Virker crew resource management trening? En studie av sjøforsvarets CRM kurs’ effekt på elever ved skolen. Master thesis, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.Google Scholar
Cavaleiro, S. C., Gomes, C. and Lopes, M. P. (2020). Bridge resource management: Training for the minimisation of human error in the military naval context. The Journal of Navigation, 73(5), 1146–1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Da Conceição, V. P., Mendes, J. B., Teodoro, M. F. and Dahlman, J. (2019). Validation of a behavioral marker system for rating cadet's non-technical skills. TransNav: International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation, 13(1), 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Espevik, R., Saus, E. R. and Olsen, O. K. (2017). Exploring the core of crew resource management course: Speak up or stay silent. International Maritime Health, 68(2), 126–132.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flin, R., Martin, L., Goeters, K. M., Hoermann, H. J., Amalberti, R., Valot, C. and Nijhuis, H. (2003). Development of the NOTECHS (non-technical skills) system for assessing pilots’ CRM skills. Human Factors and Aerospace Safety, 3, 97–120.Google Scholar
Foushee, H. (1984). Dyads and triads at 35,000 feet: Factors affecting group process and aircrew performance. American Psychologist, 39, 885–893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartmann, D. P. and Wood, D. D. (1990). Observational methods. In: Bellack, A. S., Hersen, M. and Kazdin, A. E. (eds.). International Handbook of Behavior Modification and Therapy, Boston, MA: Springer, 107–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Havinga, J., De Boer, R. J., Rae, A. and Dekker, S. W. (2017). How did crew resource management take-off outside of the cockpit? A systematic review of how crew resource management training is conceptualised and evaluated for non-pilots. Safety, 3(4), 26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Helmreich, R. L. (1984). Cockpit management attitudes. Human Factors, 26, 583–589.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Helmreich, R. L. and Wilhelm, J. A. (1991). Outcomes of crew resource management training. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 1(4), 287–300.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Helmreich, R. L., Foushee, C., Benson, R. and Russini, W. (1986). Cockpit resource management: Exploring the attitude-performance linkage. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 57, 1198–1200.Google ScholarPubMed
Helmreich, R. L., Merritt, A. C. and Wilhelm, J. A. (1999). The evolution of crew resource management training in commercial aviation. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 9(1), 19–32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hetherington, C., Flin, R. and Mearns, K. (2006). Safety in shipping: The human element. Journal of Safety Research, 37(4), 401–411.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holgado Tello, F. P., Chacón Moscoso, S., Barbero García, I. and Sanduvete Chaves, S. (2006). Training satisfaction rating scale. Development of a measurement model using polychoric correlations. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 22(4), 268–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hong, S. K. and Kim, H. (2016). Bridge resource management training programs in Korea and their effectiveness. Journal of the Ergonomic Society of Korea, 35(4), 237–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hróbjartsson, A., Thomsen, A. S. S., Emanuelsson, F., Tendal, B., Hilden, J., Boutron, I. and Brorson, S. (2013). Observer bias in randomized clinical trials with measurement scale outcomes: A systematic review of trials with both blinded and nonblinded assessors. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 185(4), E201–E211.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hwang, J. G. and Yang, M. C. (2001). An optimality theory for mid p-values in 2 × 2 contingency tables. Statistica Sinica, 11, 807–826.Google Scholar
Kent, R. N. and Foster, S. L. (1977). Direct observational procedures: Methodological issues in naturalistic settings. In: Ciminero, A. R., Calhoun, K. S. and Adams, H. E. (eds.). Handbook of Behavioral Assessment, New York: John Wiley & Sons, 279–328.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1979). Techniques for evaluating training programs. Training & Development Journal, 33(6), 3–9.Google Scholar
Lancaster, H. O. (1961). Significance tests in discrete distributions. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 56(294), 223–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marquardt, N., Robelski, S. and Hoeger, R. (2010). Crew resource management training within the automotive industry: Does it work? Human Factors, 52(2), 308–315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
O'Connor, P., Campbell, J., Newon, J., Melton, J., Salas, E. and Wilson, K. A. (2008). Crew resource management training effectiveness: A meta-analysis and some critical needs. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 18(4), 353–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
R Core Team. (2017). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.Google Scholar
Röttger, S., Vetter, S. and Kowalski, J. T. (2013). Ship management attitudes and their relation to behavior and performance. Human Factors, 55(3), 659–671.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Röttger, S., Krey, H., Vetter, S., Stein, M. and Kowalski, J. (2015). What Bridge Teams Do – An Exhaustive Coding Manual for the Assessment of Team Interactions in Seafaring. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the HFES Europe Chapter 2015 in Groningen, NL. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282974408_What_bridge_teams_do_-_an_exhaustive_coding_manual_for_the_assessment_of_team_interactions_in_seafaringGoogle Scholar
Röttger, S., Vetter, S. and Kowalski, J. T. (2016). Effects of a classroom-based bridge resource management training on knowledge, attitudes, behaviour and performance of junior naval officers. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 15(1), 143–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saeed, F., Wall, A., Roberts, C., Riahi, R. and Bury, A. (2017). A proposed quantitative methodology for the evaluation of the effectiveness of human element, leadership and management (HELM) training in the UK. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 16(1), 115–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salas, E., Burke, C. S., Bowers, C. A. and Wilson, K. A. (2001). Team training in the skies: Does crew resource management (CRM) training work? Human Factors, 43(4), 641–674.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salas, E., Benishek, L., Coultas, C., Dietz, A., Grossmann, R., Lazzara, E. and Oglesby, J. (2015). Team Training Essentials. A Research-Based Guide. New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanjeev Vakil, K. (2019). Approaches to teamwork and leadership training in maritime education and training institutions: A comparative analysis of the perspectives of seafarers towards teamwork and leadership across different regions. World Maritime University Dissertations, 1176, Malmö, Sweden.Google Scholar
Sellberg, C. and Viktorelius, M. (2020). From technical and non-technical skills to hybrid minds: Reconceptualizing cognition and learning in semi-automated environments. In: Nazir, S., Ahram, T. and Karwowski, W. (eds.). Advances in Human Factors in Training, Education, and Learning Sciences. Proceedings of the AHFE 2020 Virtual Conference on Human Factors in Training, Education, and Learning Sciences, Cham, Switzerland: Springer, 191–197.Google Scholar
Staufenbiel, T. (2000). Fragebogen zur Evaluation von universitären Lehrveranstaltungen durch Studierende und Lehrende. [Questionnaire for the evaluation of university courses by students and teachers]. Diagnostica, 46(4), 169–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tvedt, S. D., Espevik, R., Oltedal, H. A., Fjeld, G. P. and Mjelde, F. V. (2018). Can you teach an old seadog new tricks? Experimental evaluation of BRM training in the commercial fleet. Necesse, 3(2), 164–179.Google Scholar
Van Avermaete, J. and Kruijsen, E. (1998). NOTECHS: The evaluation of non-technical skills of multi-pilot aircrew in relation to the JAR-FCL requirements. EUROCONTROL NOTECHS Project Final Report: CR, 98443.Google Scholar
Wahl, A. M. and Kongsvik, T. (2018). Crew resource management training in the maritime industry: A literature review. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs, 17(3), 377–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar