Carl Westin

6-7 Result study 2 137 6-7 Result study 2 Data from 56 solutions was collected, consisting of four scenarios repeated across fourteen participants. 6-7-1 Solution parameter hierarchy analysis Figure 6-9 shows the solution distribution for both trainees and experienced con- trollers across 36 and 20 solutions, respectively. Interacting with both aircraft was more common among trainees (55.6%), while experienced controllers almost equally often interacted with one (45.0%) or both aircraft (40.0%). Experienced controllers implemented slightly more solutions involving three or more interac- tions than trainees did (15.0% and 11.1%, respectively). Similar to Study 1, these solutions were disregarded from further analysis and are not depicted in Figure 6-9. For both groups, the most frequent solution consisted of interacting either with OM or first QS than OM. Solutions were most often solved by vectoring. DS 4 in Figure 6-9 shows a large variation in solutions for trainees, with sixteen unique solutions across 36 solved conflicts. The two most common solutions consisted of vectoring OM to the right behind QS (16.7%), or first vectoring QS right and then OM right (16.7%). In contrast, the group of experienced controllers solved 20 conflicts in eight different ways. Similar to trainees, experienced controllers frequently solved the conflict by vectoring QS left (30.0%). In contrast to trainees, however, two other frequent solutions consisted of vectoring QS left (15.0%), or first vectoring QS left and then OM left (20.0%). The sunburst charts in Figure 6-10(a) and (b) shows the proportion of consistent trainees and experienced controllers. Overall, more trainees (66.7%) were found consistent than experienced controllers (40.0%). While experienced controllers agreed on interacting with one aircraft (40.0%), groups of consistent trainees dis- agreed on interacting with one (22.2%) or both aircraft (44.4%). Only one partici- pant was found consistent according to DS 4, vectoring OM to the right. Although the sample with experienced controllers was considerably smaller than the trainees sample, results suggest that experienced controllers are less var- ied in their use of solutions. Surprisingly, however, experienced controllers were overall not found more consistent than trainees. 6-7-2 Control problem analysis Figure 6-11 shows the distribution of solutions according to the control problem classification for both trainees and experienced controllers. For the latter, clear- ing the controlled aircraft behind the intruder (DS 1) was more common than the