Abstract: Optimal human performance is a key goal in the professional setting of military pilots, which is a highly challenging atmosphere. The aviation environment requires substantial cognitive effort and is rich in potential stressors. Therefore, it is important to analyze variables such as mental workload to ensure safe conditions. Pilot mental workload could be measured using several tools, but most of them are very subjective. This paper details research conducted with military pilots using psychophysiological methods such as electroencephalography (EEG) and heart rate (HR) monitoring. The data were measured in a simulator as well as under real flight conditions. All of the pilots were exposed to highly demanding flight tasks and showed big individual response differences. On that basis, the individual pattern for each pilot was created counting different EEG features and heart rate variations. Later on, it was possible to distinguish the most difficult flight tasks for each pilot that should be more extensively trained. For training purposes, an application was developed for the instructors to decide which of the specific tasks to focus on during follow-up training. This complex system can help instructors detect the mentally demanding parts of the flight and enhance the training of military pilots to achieve optimal performance.
Abstract: Software maintenance and mainly software
comprehension pose the largest costs in the software lifecycle. In
order to assess the cost of software comprehension, various
complexity measures have been proposed in the literature. This paper
proposes new cognitive-spatial complexity measures, which combine
the impact of spatial as well as architectural aspect of the software to
compute the software complexity. The spatial aspect of the software
complexity is taken into account using the lexical distances (in
number of lines of code) between different program elements and the
architectural aspect of the software complexity is taken into
consideration using the cognitive weights of control structures
present in control flow of the program. The proposed measures are
evaluated using standard axiomatic frameworks and then, the
proposed measures are compared with the corresponding existing
cognitive complexity measures as well as the spatial complexity
measures for object-oriented software. This study establishes that the
proposed measures are better indicators of the cognitive effort
required for software comprehension than the other existing
complexity measures for object-oriented software.
Abstract: In two studies we tested the hypothesis that the
appropriate linguistic formulation of a deontic rule – i.e. the
formulation which clarifies the monadic nature of deontic operators
- should produce more correct responses than the conditional
formulation in Wason selection task. We tested this assumption by
presenting a prescription rule and a prohibition rule in conditional
vs. proper deontic formulation. We contrasted this hypothesis with
two other hypotheses derived from social contract theory and
relevance theory. According to the first theory, a deontic rule
expressed in terms of cost-benefit should elicit a cheater detection
module, sensible to mental states attributions and thus able to
discriminate intentional rule violations from accidental rule
violations. We tested this prevision by distinguishing the two types
of violations. According to relevance theory, performance in
selection task should improve by increasing cognitive effect and
decreasing cognitive effort. We tested this prevision by focusing
experimental instructions on the rule vs. the action covered by the
rule. In study 1, in which 480 undergraduates participated, we
tested these predictions through a 2 x 2 x 2 x 2 (type of the rule x
rule formulation x type of violation x experimental instructions)
between-subjects design. In study 2 – carried out by means of a 2 x
2 (rule formulation x type of violation) between-subjects design -
we retested the hypothesis of rule formulation vs. the cheaterdetection
hypothesis through a new version of selection task in
which intentional vs. accidental rule violations were better
discriminated. 240 undergraduates participated in this study.
Results corroborate our hypothesis and challenge the contrasting
assumptions. However, they show that the conditional formulation
of deontic rules produces a lower performance than what is
reported in literature.