Program Highlights

Program Highlights

Updated April 24, 2017

All event locations are held on the Wright State University campus unless otherwise stated.
Most functions on campus are held in the Student Union building. 

International Breakfast
Monday 0830-1000 Holiday Inn Hotel

All are welcome to join us for breakfast any time between 0830 and 1000 to get acquainted or to catch up before the meeting. Those who stay at the Holidays Inn, please use the breakfast coupon included in your room. International attendees who are not staying at the Holidays Inn, please give your check to the ISAP organizers at breakfast.


Monday 1000-1500

All workshop attendees may go directly to the specific workshop location or go to the Registration Table at the Skylight Lobby in the Student Union at least 15 minutes ahead of time and will be guided to the specific workshop location.

Aircrew Fatigue:  A Review of the Causes, Consequences, and Countermeasures
Lynn Caldwell
Naval Medical Research Unit-Dayton
Room Atlantis, Student Union

In modern aviation operations, aircrew fatigue has become a serious but often unrecognized problem. The unpredictable work hours, long duty periods, circadian disruptions, and disturbed or restricted sleep that are commonly experienced by aviation personnel strain the body’s adaptive capabilities. As a result, crewmembers often report for duty in a fatigued state, resulting in mistakes, slow responses, cognitive difficulties, and mood disturbances which in turn can lead to performance problems and compromised safety. Aircrew fatigue can be effectively mitigated, but only if scientifically validated strategies are systematically applied. These include 1) the implementation of crew scheduling procedures that are based on up-to-date scientific information about the underpinnings of fatigue; 2) the implementation of scientifically-based in-flight counter-fatigue practices; 3) education of crew and crew schedulers on the importance of sleep and circadian rhythms in effective fatigue management; and 4) the utilization of effective strategies for optimizing off-duty sleep periods. Once comprehensive, scientifically-validated fatigue-risk mitigation processes are fully integrated into the aviation safety system, fatigue can be effectively managed, and safety and performance can be optimized.

The fatigue workshop will outline the importance of addressing fatigue as a danger in aviation, the basic physiological mechanisms underlying fatigue, and the most common causes of fatigue in air transport and other settings. In addition, the workshop will present ways to recognize fatigue in operational environments, and it will provide information about the relative efficacy of various fatigue countermeasures.


Applied Cognitive Systems Engineering in Aviation
M.M. (René) van Paassen, Clark Borst, Joost Ellerbroek, Annemarie Landman
Delft University of Technology, Delft, The Netherlands
Room 005 Library

Cognitive Systems Engineering (CSE) and its main application, Ecological Interface Design (EID), are approximately 30 years old now. Starting with an example application in process control, and a seminal publication in 1992, EID found its way into process control first. This sparked interest in other safety-critical application domains, most notably, vehicle control in the aviation domain.

A distinctive trait of the approach has been the recognition that in all human endeavors we are bound by the constraints posed upon us by our surroundings. Our design choices, economics, goals and needs and the physics of the world constrain the possible courses of action. The starting point in CSE is to determine what these constraints are. In contrast to “Cognitive Psychology” approaches, CSE starts not by looking what is inside the head (of the operator or user), but at what the head is inside of. EID continues by finding a visualization for the constraints thus discovered.

In this workshop a test case of designing a visualization for an Airborne Separation Assurance System (ASAS) will be central. First, a theoretical background will be provided dealing with the utilization of a constraint-based design method in the aviation vehicle control domain. Second, an participants are invited to work on a work domain analysis, and reflect on how results of this analysis may influence display design. Answering these proposal, the workshop organizers will explain several approaches and EID designs in aircraft energy management, conflict resolution and Air Traffic Control applications. Finally, the workshop applicants can participate in a multi-actor airborne separation assurance experiment. As such, this workshop completes a full design cycle comprising theory, modeling, and evaluation.


Introduction to R
Joe Houpt
Wright State University
Room 366 Fawcett Building

This workshop will give a basic introduction to R. I will cover the basics of the environment, including data types, simple operations, control flow and basic plotting. I will then cover reading data into R and saving output. Finally, I will cover a few statistical tests, including t-tests, linear regression and ANOVA. Time permitting I will introduce some packages that are likely to be highly useful to attendees. This workshop is meant to be hands on and interactive. Computers will be provided for this workshop. If you bring your own laptop, please have R and RStudio installed. If you have difficult installing either, feel free to contact


Stanley Roscoe Best Student Paper Competition Finalists’ Presentation
Monday 1600-1800 Room Atlantis, Student Union

The student finalists will be selected by a panel of judges based on paper submissions. The finalists are requested to present their work to the panel of judges on Monday, May 8 and the winner will be recognized during the Wednesday Banquet. All are welcome to attend the finalists’ presentations and have a first look at the students that will create the future of Aviation Psychology!


Opening Reception
Monday 1900-2100, Pathfinder Lounge, Student Union

Celebrate the Opening of the Symposium! Come catch up with your old friends and meet new ones. Chat about your latest conquests and greatest strides or follies made in aviation psychology in the midst of great food, music, and a cash bar.

Induction of ISAP Honorary Fellows

This year we honor Dr. Philip J. Smith for his enduring and extraordinary contributions to the field of aviation psychology.

Dr. Philip J. Smith is Professor and Chair of the Department of Integrated Systems Engineering at The Ohio State University. He is recognized as a leader in air traffic flow management, air traffic control, airline operations control, flight deck design, human automation interaction, collaborative decision making (CDM) and the design of distributed work systems in the National Airspace System, as well as in the design of systems for the integrated management of airport surface and airspace constraints. He is also conducting research on the human factors issues associated with the integration of unmanned aerial systems into the airspace system. His expertise encompasses cognitive systems engineering, human factors engineering, artificial intelligence, human-automation interaction and the design of problem-based learning environments.

Dr. Smith is a Fellow of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, and has received numerous awards, including the Air Traffic Control Association David J. Hurley Memorial Award for Research in Collaborative Decision Making, 2009; Best Paper Award for the 2008 Air Traffic Control Association Conference; the National Aviation Safety Award, Airline Dispatchers Federation, 2001; and the Human Factors Best Article Award (Best Paper in Human Factors), 1999. He is also on the editorial boards of the AIAA Journal of Air Transportation and the HFES Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making and a member of the FAA REDAC Human Factors Subgroup. In addition, he has served on two National Academy Study Panels to evaluate the state of the art in air traffic controller staffing models.


Keynote Address
Tuesday 0830-955, Room Apollo, Student Union

On Computational Wings

Dr. Kenneth Ford
Florida Institute for Human & Machine Cognition  

After decades of pundits and philosophers arguing that AI is impossible, suddenly that argument has been replaced with the assertion that not only is it possible, but that it is inevitable, perhaps imminent, and apocalyptically dangerous.  In only about a decade, the conversation has shifted from you can’t do it … to we shouldn’t do it !  My purpose in this talk will not be to go into these arguments, but rather to draw your attention to an interesting historical parallel between AI and another, older, technology which was also controversial, thought to be impossible, and then deemed to be a great danger to the human race: artificial flight. From the very beginning, and until modern times, attempts at flight sought to imitate the behavior and specific implementation details of birds.  But the Wright brothers were not trying to mimic bird flight, or build an ornithopter. They asked quite different questions, not about flapping or feathers, but about lift, stability and the dynamics of turning in air. The “imitation game” of the Turing Test has misdirected the ambitions of AI, just as a concern with feathers and flapping misdirected early efforts at flight. Now that we understand them, it is clear that the laws of aerodynamics apply to any wing, natural or artificial; and in the same way the laws of thought apply to reasoning done by any cognitive agent, humans, machine or — we think most interesting of all — a combination of both, working together. Boole believed, as did Leibniz and Lull before him, that human thought is mastered by laws, which could account for how people think. Perhaps computation itself is the air that provides lift for the wings of thought. At the end of this talk I will review some research underway at IHMC with a particular emphasis on the results and “lessons learned” arising from the DARPA Robotics Challenge.

About Dr. Kenneth Ford


Invited Address
Wednesday 1300-1350, Room Apollo, Student Union

On Stories of Technology Change Describe the Congestion, Cascades & Conflicts that Arise When Apparent Benefits Get Hijacked

Dr. David Woods
Ohio State University

Today’s common beliefs about increasingly autonomous capabilities replay what has been observed in previous cycles of technology change. New capabilities trigger a much wider and more complex set of reverberations, including new forms of complexity and new risks. Risks associated with these complexities are ignored and downplayed, setting the stage for future automation surprises when advocates are surprised by negative unintended consequences that offset apparent benefits. Claims about the future effects that will follow from deployment of more autonomous capabilities are precarious and subject to well documented biases. This cycle of change is different in one major way: increasingly autonomous capabilities are needed to manage the scale of operations people seek to meet stakeholder pressures.

First, there are new risks that emerge as people in different roles search for advantage by deploying increasingly autonomous technologies at scale. These risks are measurable but require modifications to common practices for risk analysis and reliability engineering.  Second, one can design for the new challenges and new complexities that are certain to arise during this period of technology change. There are new opportunities for innovations to tame and manage the growth in complexity that accompanies deploying autonomous technologies into today’s interconnected world.

The risks of autonomy and design solutions will be covered including Doyle’s Catch, the reification fallacy, creeping complexity, hijacking of apparent benefits, life cycle extensibility, the cascade race, the fundamental miscalibration limit, overcoming the brittleness of machines, and the low performance ceiling of today’s autonomy architecture. Managing the reverberations from deploying increasingly autonomous capabilities at scale requires development and application of techniques in Resilience Engineering.

About Dr. David Woods


Invited Address
Thursday 1300-1350, Room Apollo, Student Union

Spatial Disorientation in Flight: A Multi-Dimensional Problem Needing Multi-Faceted Solutions

Dr. Bob Cheung
Defence Research and Development Canada – Toronto Research Center

Today’s common beliefs about increasingly autonomous capabilities replay what has been observed in previous cycles of technology change. New capabilities trigger a much wider and more complex set of reverberations, including new forms of complexity and new risks. Risks associated with these complexities are ignored and downplayed, setting the stage for future automation surprises when advocates are surprised by negative unintended consequences that offset apparent benefits. Claims about the future effects that will follow from deployment of more autonomous capabilities are precarious and subject to well documented biases. This cycle of change is different in one major way: increasingly autonomous capabilities are needed to manage the scale of operations people seek to meet stakeholder pressures.

During peace time, the most life threatening aeromedical problems that the air force might encounter are spatial disorientation (SD), G induced loss of consciousness (G-LOC) and to a lesser extent, hypoxia. SD is defined as the failure to perceive, or to perceive incorrectly the position, motion and attitude of the aircraft or oneself within the veridical vertical and the earth horizontal reference. The mechanism of spatial orientation is based on the neural integration of concordant and redundant visual, vestibular and somatosensory inputs and critical interpretation with our internal model established from past experience and training. Unlike G-induced loss of consciousness or hypoxia, SD occurs in less well-defined environments and it is influenced by physiological and perceptual limitations. Assessment of the role played by SD in any mishap may have to rely on circumstantial evidence and is always open to investigator bias. Mishap analysis often reveals multiple causal factors leading to the final event. New flight display technologies might also contribute to SD susceptibility. The complexity of SD in the flight environment demands a “wide-angle” holistic approach. Examples will be provided in this presentation to demonstrate the necessity of a coordinated effort from operators, scientists, engineers and research sponsors to lessen the impact of SD on flight safety.

About Dr. Bob Cheung


Plenary Practitioner and Researcher Panels
Wednesday and Thursday 0830-0955 Room Apollo, Student Union

The overarching goal of the Practitioners and Researchers panels is to foster dialogues between operational personnel and researchers towards a safer and serviceable sky.

Plenary Practitioner Panel: Operational Issues in Aviation Psychology

Practitioner Panelists:

    Kathy Fox
    Transportation Safety Board of Canada




    Michael Hagler
    Station Manager for Line Maintenance
    Delta Airlines.




    Richard J Ranaudo
    Aerospace Consultant
    Former NASA Research Pilot




    Helena Reidemar
    Captain of Boeing 717, Delta Air Lines
    Director of Human Factors in the ALPA Air Safety Organization
    Human Factors & Training Group




    Stephen Casner
    Research Psychologist
    NASA Ames Research Center





Plenary Researcher Panel: Bridging the Gulf: Putting Science to Work

The researchers on this panel were asked to share their experiences (successes and failures) in interacting with domain practitioners (e.g., domain experts, operators, users, designers, program offices). They were asked to reflect on the skills that lead to satisfying collaborations; and on the potential benefits with respect to enhancing the quality of basic understanding of human performance and with respect to discovering innovative solutions to important practical problems in the aviation domain.  

In the book Pasteur’s Quadrant (1997), Donald Stokes challenges the dichotomy between basic and applied research that was established and eventually institutionalized in academic, research, and funding institutions as a result of Vannevar Bush’s influential report written following World War II [Science, the Endless Frontier, 1945]. Stokes argued convincingly that the desire for basic understanding and considerations for practical applications are not in opposition. In other words, science is not a zero-sum game.  Satisfaction of either the basic or applied motivation does not necessarily come at the expense of the other. Further, he suggested that when the basic and applied motivations are jointly attended (as in Pasteur’s Quadrant) the quality of science is generally heightened.  The field of Aviation Psychology is a prime example of a research domain where the desires for deeper understanding and for solutions to important practical problems are intimately intertwined. 

While the motivations of basic and applied science are not necessarily in conflict, there are unique challenges associated with working in Pasteur’s Quadrant. One of these challenges is the need to work closely with domain practitioners to ensure that:

  1. the appropriate research questions are framed [i.e., questions have external validity relative to practical aviation problems]; 
  2. the research questions are framed in a way that is representative of the situated demands of the aviation domain [i.e., representative design of experiments and representative sampling of participants]; and 
  3. the results are articulated in a way that makes the practical implications evident [i.e., the results can be generalized]. 

While the importance of working closely with domain practitioners will be evident to most of the people in the field of Aviation Psychology, it is a sad fact that most of us have had very little formal training to help us do this well. Most of us must discover how to do this on the job. Which means, we have had to learn through trial and error. A primary motivation for this panel is to tap into the experiences of the panelists, so that we can learn from their errors and successes. The members of this panel were asked to reflect on their experiences in engaging with practitioner communities (e.g., domain experts, operators, users, designers, program offices), in terms of both:

  1. shaping research questions and theory, and
  2. translating discoveries into practical solutions. 

The following questions were suggested to help seed the discussion. However, the panelists were encouraged not be over-constrained by the questions; and to let their own experiences be the guide for their comments. They were encouraged to share specific stories that were significant in shaping their skills in working with domain practitioners. 

  • What are the potential values of such engagements for
    • the quality of basic research?
    • the quality of practice?
  • What are the challenges to achieving effective collaborations?
    • with respect to the goals of basic research?
    • with respect to translating discoveries into practice?
  • Are there strategies for meeting and overcoming the challenges? 
    • selecting the “right” practitioners?
    • overcoming cultural differences?
    • structuring the engagement?

Researcher Panelists:

    Frédéric Dehais
    Institut Supérieur de l'Aéronautique et de l'Espace (ISAE)




    Kevin Gluck
    Principal Cognitive Scientist
    Air Force Research Laboratory




    Alex Kirlik
    University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign



    Wesley Olsen
    Assistant Group Leader
    MIT Lincoln Laboratory




    John Flach
    Wright State University




Poster Sessions
Tuesday 1615-1740 and Wednesday 1540-1705, Room Apollo, Student Union

Circulate and discuss the latest findings with the presenters while enjoying hors d'oeuvres and a cash bar. The collegial atmosphere will be a great way to conclude the day’s technical activities and transition into the evening’s activities.



Night Out at the Greene
Tuesday Evening, The Greene

Following the Tuesday Poster Session, visit The Greene in Beavercreek for some shopping and dining. The Greene is a 72-acre new town center featuring pedestrian-friendly streetscapes, open-air gathering spaces, and many places to eat. Transportation to and from the Greene will be available. If you have not already, round-trip bus fare can be purchased at the Registration Table. See  


The ISAP Banquet at the Dayton Art Institute
Wednesday 1800-2200, 456 Belmonte Park North, Dayton, Ohio 45405


The official ISAP Banquet will be held at the Dayton Art Institute. The museum is one of the region’s premier fine arts museum with a collection that spans 5,000 years of art history. The museum sits atop a hill on the edge of the Great Miami River overlooking downtown Dayton. The museum’s founding patrons included prominent community leaders such as Orville Wright and the Pattersons of NCR. The Dicke Wing of American Art and the Berry Wing of European Art will be open until the start of dinner. There will be a cash bar at the Gothic Cloister where dinner is held and will start at 1930 See more at

Invited Banquet Speaker

Great Moments in ISAP History

Dr. Richard S. Jensen
Founder of the International Symposium on Aviation Psychology

About Dr. Richard S. Jensen




Induction of ISAP Honorary Fellows

This year we honor Dr. John M. Flach for his enduring and extraordinary contributions to the field of aviation psychology.

Dr. John M. Flach received his Ph.D. (Human Experimental Psychology) from The Ohio State University in 1984. John was an assistant professor at the University of Illinois from 1984 to 1990 where he held joint appointments in the Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering, the Psychology Department, and the Institute of Aviation. In 1990 he joined the Psychology Department at Wright State University. He served as department chair from 2004 – 2013. He currently holds the rank of Professor. He teaches graduate and undergraduate courses in the areas of applied cognitive psychology and human factors. John is interested in general issues of coordination and control in sociotechnical systems. Specific research topics have included visual control of locomotion, interface design, decision-making, and sociotechnical systems. John is particularly interested in applications of this research in the domains of aviation, medicine, highway safety, and assistive technologies. In addition to more than 175 scientific publications, John is a co-author of three books: Control Theory for Humans (with Rich Jagacinski); Display and Interface Design (with Kevin Bennett); and What Matters? (with Fred Vorhoorst). John has also recently begun a blog, titled Perspicacity .


Stanley N. Roscoe Best Student Paper Award

Winner of the Best Student Paper Competition will be recognized at the banquet. Student Review Panel Chair: Dr. Brian D. Simpson (Air Force Research Laboratory)





Wright Brass

Musical entertainment will be provided by the innovative and versatile United States Air Force Band of Flight’s Wright Brass ensemble. 





Thursday Picnic
1800-2000 Rinzler and Mulholland Field

Relax and recharge at a picnic with fun, games, food, and drinks on the final evening of the symposium! Shuttle to and from the picnic and soccer field will be available.

Aviation Soccer Cup
Come dressed to compete! Soccer players, please contact John Flach,





Wright-Patterson Air Force Base Tour
Friday 0830-1200 Student Union Entrance

Air Force Research Laboratory
Battlefield Acoustics Branch

A visit to the Battlespace Acoustics Branch will include a tour of their world-class facilities, where scientists conduct research on communication, spatial hearing, hearing protection, and the acoustics of operational environments, as well as develop new auditory/multimodal displays and interfaces.  Tour stops will include a visit to the Auditory Localization Facility, a large anechoic chamber within which exists a 14-ft-diameter sphere with 277 loudspeakers mounted on its surface.  Studies on sound localization, speech perception, and multisensory interactions take place in this facility, as well as measurements for the development of 3D auditory displays.  Another stop on the tour will be the Hearing Protection Evaluation Facility, which includes two reverberant chambers, one high-noise system, and an audiometric assessment room.  A third stop will be the Voice Communication Research Facility, a one-of-a-kind facility designed for studying real communication systems in operationally-relevant high-noise environments.  Finally, the tour will visit the Battlefield Airman Laboratory, where multiple technologies that are being developed and fielded for Battlefield Airmen will be demonstrated and discussed. 

Naval Medical Research Unit Dayton (NAMRU-D)

NAMDU-D performs research addressing operational and applied gaps in the areas of aerospace medicine and human factors, and environmental health effects.  The tour will include visits to the following NAMRU-D laboratories: Disorientation Research Device (DRD, aka the Kraken), a 6-axis-of-motion platform for conducting research on human motion and acceleration effects; Pilot Spatial Orientation Lab; Hypoxia and Altitude Effects laboratories; Fatigue Countermeasures Laboratory; and the Vision Sciences laboratory. 

Air Force Rresearch Laboratoy
Warfighter Readiness Division

The tour will showcase agent development work creating software representations of human behavior for use in a variety of contexts.  The tour will also showcase research in shared computing for rapid model development and validation using  Additionally, the Division is doing extensive work in game based approaches to modeling and simulation and to science technology engineering and mathematics (STEM).  We will present current work developing high fidelity models and simulations for a variety of military (and civilian) applications.  Development of several game based synthetic task environments that is under way with university partners (Texas A&M University and the University of South Florida) will be discussed.  The goal of this development work is to create common environments can be shared across University and Government research communities of interest to support individual, team and team of teams research in decision making, team training, trust and automation, and resource sharing at allocation in distributed teaming environments.  Finally, and time permitting work in a deployable live, virtual and constructive field environment we have created for training and rehearsal for emergency response, humanitarian operations personnel rescue will be presented. 


Dayton History Tour
Friday 0900-1400 Student Union Entrance

The tour will visit several museums that showcase key aspects of the history of Dayton, the Wrights, and Aviation. First stop on the tour will be The Huffman Prairie Flying Field Interpretive Center. This small museum overlooks the Huffman Prairie where the Wright Brothers did the dangerous work of developing their experimental craft into a practical aircraft. Next stop will be Carillon Historical Park. Here there is a replica of the Wright’s bicycle shop, a display that the Wright Brothers designed to showcase the first practical aircraft, and a number of other exhibits that cover key events in the history of Dayton (e.g., the development of National Cash Register (NCR), Dayton Engineering Laboratory Co. (DELCO), and the 1913 Flood). Finally, the last stop will be the National Museum of the Air Force, where exhibits cover the full history of flight, from the Wrights to modern space exploration. 

Tentative Schedule: 
0900 Leave from Student Union to Huffman Prairie Center.
1000 Arrive Carillon Historical Park
1300 Arrive Air Force Museum
1400 Return to Student Union 

Lunches and snacks can be purchased at either Carillon Park or the Air Force Museum.

Note that you may leave the tour any time or stay at a particular stop for longer. It will be possible to arrange transportation (e.g., taxi or Uber) from any of the sites to return directly to your hotel or to go to the airport.

For additional information about the sites:

The Huffman Prairie Flying Field Interpretive Center (Free)

Carillon Historical Park. ($8.00 Adults, $7.00 Seniors)

National Museum of the US Air Force (Free)