Error Detection in the Navigational Watch Based on the Behavior Analysis of Navigators

• Autorzy: Nishizaki C. , Takemoto T.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.12716/1001.09.02.01

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Poor lookouts, i.e. one of errors in situation awareness, are pointed out as the major cause of collisions of ships, through investigations of collision accidents. In order to evaluate safety measures for preventing collisions caused by poor lookouts, it is necessary to understand background factors, so called “contexts”, of errors in situation awareness regardless of occurrence of collisions. The purpose of this study is to point out the possible significant contexts, using a navigator’s situation awareness model. As a result, we point out that one of the possible significant contexts is a problem on judgment of priority levels of other ships with regard to attention.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

Navigators’ Situation Awareness Model; Human Factor; Situation Awareness; safety at sea; Sea Service; Navigational Watch; Error Detection; watchkeeping

• Wydawca: Faculty of Navigation, Gdynia Maritime University
• Czasopismo: TransNav : International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation
• Rocznik: 2015
• Tom: Vol. 9, no. 2
• Strony: 163--168
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 14 poz. rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Nishizaki C.

• National Maritime Research Institute, Tokyo, Japan

autor

Takemoto T.

• Tokyo University of Marine Science and Technology, Tokyo, Japan

Bibliografia

• 1 Imazu, H. & Koyama, T. 1986. The Valuation of a Criterion for Collision Avoidance Action. Journal of Japan Institute of Navigation. Vol.74: 117‐123. (in Japanese)
• 2 Imazu, H & Fukuto, J & Numano, M. 2002. Obstacle Zone by Targets and Its Display. Journal of Japan Institute of Navigation. Vol.107: 191‐197. (in Japanese)
• 3 Endsley, M. R. 1995. Toward a Theory of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society. Vol.37 Issue 1: 32‐64.
• 4 Corovic, B. M. & Djurovic, P. 2013. Research of Marine Accidents through the PRISM of Human Factors. PROMET ‐ Traffic & Transportation. Vol.25 No.4: 369‐377.
• 5 Hara, K. & Nagasawa, A. et al. 1990. The Subjective Risk Assessment of Ships Collision. Journal of Japan Institute of Navigation. Vol.83: 71‐80. (in Japanese)
• 6 Hara, K. & Nakamura, S. 1995. A comprehensive assessment system for the maritime traffic environment. Safety Science. Vol.19 Issue 2‐3: 203‐215.
• 7 Hollnagel, E. 1998. Cognitive reliability and error analysis method. Oxford, UK: Elsevier Science.
• 8 Kobayashi, H. & Endoh, M. 1976. Analysis of Collision Avoiding Action of Ship – From Viewpoint of Man‐Machine‐System Analysis ‐. Journal of Japan Institute of Navigation. Vol.56: 101‐109. (in Japanese)
• 9 Nakamura, S. 1996. Establishment of safety evaluation technique concerning sea traffic. Dissertation of Hiroshima University: 142‐144.
• 10 Nishizaki, C & Itoh, H et al. 2010. A Study on Error Modes and their causes of Navigational Watch. Proceeding of Autumn Conference of Japan Society of Naval Architects and Ocean Engineering. No.2010E‐G6‐7: 353‐ 356. (in Japanese)
• 11 Romer, H. & Petersen, H. J. S. & Haastrup, P. 2009. Marine Accident Frequencies ‐ Review and Recent Empirical Results ‐. Journal of Navigation. vol.48: 410‐424.
• 12 Takemoto, T & Sakamoto, Y. et al. 2007. The Characteristics of Navigator’s Error in Ships’ Collision Accidents. Proceedings of 2007 CIN‐JIN‐KINPR Joint Symposium (Asia Navigation Conference 2007): 213‐221.
• 13 Yoshimura, K & Hikida, K. et al. 2007. Evaluating the Mariner’s Workload Using the Bridge Simulator. 10th IFAC/IFIP/IFORS/IEA Symposium on Analysis: S1.1.4.
• 14 Yoshimura, K. & Nishizaki, C. et al. 2012. A Method for Quantifying the Risks of Human Error from Experiments with the ship Bridge Simulator. Proceedings of Fifth International Conference on Emerging Trends in Engineering and Technology: 86‐92.