Sean Laraway

For over a decade, the failure to reproduce findings in several disciplines, including the biomedical, behavioral, and social sciences, have led some authors to claim that there is a so-called “replication (or reproducibility) crisis” in those disciplines. The current article examines: (a) various aspects of the reproducibility of scientific studies, including definitions of reproducibility; (b) published concerns about reproducibility in the scientific literature and public press; (c) variables involved in assessing the success of attempts to reproduce a study; (d) suggested factors responsible for reproducibility failures; (e) types of validity of experimental studies and threats to validity as they relate to reproducibility; and (f) evidence for threats to reproducibility in the behavior science/analysis literature. Suggestions for improving the reproducibility of studies in behavior science and analysis are described throughout.

The effectiveness of different instrument approach charts to deliver minimum visibility and altitude information during airport equipment outages was investigated. Eighteen pilots flew simulated instrument approaches in three conditions: (a) normal operations using a standard approach chart (standard-normal), (b) equipment outage conditions using a standard approach chart (standard-outage), and (c) equipment outage conditions using a prototype decluttered approach chart (prototype-outage). Errors and retrieval times in identifying minimum altitudes and visibilities were measured. The standard-outage condition produced significantly more errors and longer retrieval times versus the standard-normal condition. The prototype-outage condition had significantly fewer errors and shorter retrieval times than did the standard-outage condition. The prototype-outage condition produced significantly fewer errors but similar retrieval times when compared with the standard-normal condition. Thus, changing the presentation of minima may reduce risk and increase safety in instrument approaches, specifically with airport equipment outages.

A Human-In-The-Loop simulation was conducted in January of 2013 in the Airspace Operations Laboratory at NASA's Ames Research Center. The simulation airspace included two en route sectors feeding the northwest corner of Atlanta's Terminal Radar Approach Control. The focus of this paper is on how uncertainties in the study's trajectory predictions impacted the controllers' ability to perform their duties. Of particular interest is how the controllers interacted with the delay information displayed in the meter list and data block while managing the arrival flows. Due to wind forecasts with 30-knot over-predictions and 30-knot under-predictions, delay value computations included errors of similar magnitude, albeit in opposite directions. However, when performing their duties in the presence of these errors, did the controllers issue clearances of similar magnitude, albeit in opposite directions? This paper describes the use of a novel technique (Interrupted Time Series) to examine the controller response data.