Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Safety Science journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/safety Pilot performance comparison between electronic and paper instrument approach charts Scott R. Winter a, ⁎ , Mattie N. Milner a , Stephen Rice a , Dylan Bush a , Daniel A. Marte a , Evan Adkins a , Angela Roccasecca a , Timothy G. Rosser b , Gajapriya Tamilselvan b a Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, 600 South Clyde Morris Blvd., Daytona Beach, FL 32114, United States b Florida Institute of Technology, 150 West University Blvd., Melbourne, FL 32901, United States ARTICLE INFO Keywords: Electronic flight bags NASA TLX Workload Flight performance Skill degradation ABSTRACT Electronic flight bags (EFB’s) have become common in the era of technologically advanced aircraft (TAA) and glass cockpits. However, many pilots still rely on paper charts as backups in case of electronic failures. The purpose of this study was to examine pilot performance differences when using electronic and paper instrument approach charts. Twenty-nine participants from a large university completed the study in a fixed-based flight- training device (FTD). While completing a flight between two major cities, the participants were asked to answer questions on instrument approach charts using an electronic flight bag. Halfway through the questions, the electronic flight bag was said to have failed, and participants were provided with paper charts. The findings indicate that participants’ response time was significantly lower using electronic charts over paper ones. Flight performance, as observed via video footage, indicated far worse control of altitude and course when using paper charts than when electronic charts were used. In a post-test instrument, participants’ poorly estimated the their average response time to questions in both conditions. Finally, participants’ indicated that they felt the use of electronic charts reduced their workload as measured by the NASA TLX. The paper discusses the practical ap- plications of these findings. 1. Introduction and review of literature Before airplane cockpits became significantly more automated, many pilots controlled the airplane via manual inputs and calculations, which they determined using control panels and instrument displays (i.e. air speed, altitude, compass, etc.) However, as technology has advanced, many tools that pilots use have become increasingly auto- mated, which has helped reduce workload, minimize errors, and sup- port safer airline operations (Ebbatson, Harris, Huddlestone, & Sears, 2010; German & Rhodes, 2016). Unfortunately, a negative side effect from increasing automation in the cockpit is that pilots may become complacent and suffer from skill degradation (Farr, 1987; Waldock, 2017; Weiner & Curry, 1980;). Skill degradation typically occurs when a skill is learned or knowledge is acquired but then that skill or knowledge is not used for an extended period of time and the person either forgets the skill or takes a longer time to recall the appropriate information (Farr, 1987; Winfred, Bennett, Stanush, & McNelly, 1998). For example, pilots previously used paper charts when calculating airplane performance data, fuel calculations, etc.; however, most pilots now use electronic flight bags (EFB) as their main source of information and calculations. It may not seem like a major issue if a person takes longer to perform a task due to skill degradation; however, if that person is overestimating their performance (illusory superiority) then there could be severe consequences. For workers in a high-stakes job they should have an accurate awareness of their own capabilities so they can perform their job to the best of their ability. The purpose of this study will be to examine pilot performance differences when using electronic and paper instrument approach charts. Additionally, parti- cipants will be asked to complete the NASA TLX to estimate their workload in both conditions, and finally, pilots will estimate their re- sponse time to questions. A background is provided on electronic flight bags, skill degradation, and the theoretical foundations of this study. 1.1. Electronic flights bags In a traditional cockpit environment, all pertinent flight information that the pilot required was found in paper charts, which helped pilots determine flight path, calculate performance data, perform fuel calcu- lations, etc. (Fitzsimmons, 2002; U.S. Department of Transportation, 2014). However, as automation in the cockpit increased, pilots’ tools https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2017.12.016 Received 24 June 2017; Received in revised form 24 October 2017; Accepted 13 December 2017 ⁎ Corresponding author at: College of Aviation, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, 600 South Clyde Morris Blvd., Daytona Beach, FL 32114, United States. E-mail address: scott.winter@mac.com (S.R. Winter). Safety Science 103 (2018) 280–286 0925-7535/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. T