Loss of Control (LOC) accidents are a major threat for aviation, and contribute the highest risk for fatalities in all aviation accidents. The major contributor to LOC accidents is pilot spatial disorientation (SD), which accounts for roughly 32% of all LOC accidents. A pilot experiences SD during flight when the pilot's expectation of the aircraft's state deviates from reality. This deviation results from a number of underlying mechanisms, such as distraction, failure to monitor flight instruments, and vestibular illusions. Previous researchers have developed computational models to understand those mechanisms. However, these models are limited in scope as they do not model the pilot's knowledge of the aircraft dynamics. This research proposes a novel model to predict the best-possible-pilot-expectation of the aircraft state given vestibular and visual cues. The proposed model uses a Model-Based Observer (MBO) as the infrastructure needed to establish an “expert pilot”. Expert pilots are known to form an internal model of the operated system through training and experience, which allows the expert to generate better internal expectations of the system states. Pilots' internal expectations are enhanced by the presence of information fed through the pilots̕ sensory systems. Thus, the proposed model integrates pilot's knowledge of the system dynamics (i.e. an aircraft model) with a continuous vestibular sensory model and a discrete visual-sampling sensory model. The computational model serves to investigate the underlying mechanisms of SD during flight and provide a quantitative analysis tool to support flight deck and countermeasure designs.

Le consensus a pour finalité d’éliminer le conflit. Il aimerait pouvoir sacraliser de nouvelles normes dans une société en crise de rituel. Hélas, la réalité nous montre que l’étoffe du consensus est tissée de soumission librement consentie, de nécessités et de jeux de pouvoir très liés aux plaisirs immédiats. A force d’habitude, l’exigence de consensus change le remède en poison. Le consensus sonne le glas de l’éthique. En cherchant l’unité, le consensus diabolise le conflit et cherche expressément à l’éliminer du fait de son chaos apparent. Le dissensus, lui, en mettant la parole en tension, assure le lien fécond du vivreensemble. La dualité est la clef naturelle qui rationalise la sociabilité des contraires. Le dissensus privilégie l’association des différences pour assurer la représentation de chacune d’entre elles. Ce n’est qu’à partir d’une heuristique naturelle et holiste de l’altérité que le sujet peut se développer en tant que soimême et différent. De cette façon, un « double-je » se construit, capable à la fois de dire courageusement « me voici », face à la menace potentielle de l’autre mais surtout capable de ce même courage pour palier la vulnérabilité de cet autre quand ses forces de résistance l’abandonnent. Le dissensus signe l’émancipation et le dépli du sujet visant le dépassement de soi. La réussite de cette démarche d’ipséité se confirme quand la puissance de déploiement se met au service de la vulnérabilité d’autrui en termes de sollicitude. Ce travail essaie de proposer le dissensus comme un conflit sain et nécessaire, garant d’une éthique d’ouverture, une voie d’excellence pour ceux qui sont concernés par ce que l’homme peut offrir de meilleur : un soin / Finality of consensus is to eliminate conflict. It tries to sacrilize news Norms in a rituals crisis Society. Reality shows that consensus material is woven of submission freely agreed, of necessities and power games closely linked to instantaneous pleasures. By dint of habits, consensus demand substitute Poison for Remedy; consensus sounds Ethics kneel death. Consensus demonizes conflict by seeking unity, and explicitly seeks with elimination of it, regarding its visible chaos. A contrario, Dissensus assures ethics blow of the ‘living-together’ concept by fertile speech link. Duality is the natural solution, which rationalizes opposites’ sociability. Dissensus privileges differences coexistences, rather than weakest shakeout. Subject can build himself up by his self fulfillment, and as a different man, only from a natural and holist heuristic otherness. Thereby, a ‘double-I’ build itself, able to say courageously ‘Here I am’ to other one’s potential threaten, and especially able to face other one’s vulnerability with the same courage, when his resistance forces give-up. Dissensus signs subject emancipation and opening, aiming at going beyond of oneself. Displaying process goes thought an ipseity reasoning, which emerges from otherness, free itself from the latter, to finally return to it, in solicitude terms: live with, against and for other one. This work tries to show Dissensus as a sound and required conflict which guarantees an opening Ethics, an excellence way for the ones who are concerned by the best thing a human being can offer : a Care

<p>Best possible self (BPS) is one of the most widely used positive psychology interventions shown in the laboratory to effectively improve participants’ overall well-being in both the short- and long-term. However, limited research has been conducted in real-world contexts. This dissertation aims to explore the practical application of BPS integrated into the instructional design for reflective activities in real-world class settings. Three papers were included in this dissertation conducted in both undergraduate (preservice teachers) and graduate (novice instructional designers) classes: the first paper examined BPS’s effects in promoting preservice teachers’ overall well-being through a quantitative method; the second paper measured BPS’s effects in improving preservice teachers’ attitudes towards technology integration through a quantitative approach; the third paper explored novice instructional designers’ attitudes towards BPS and the relationships with their well-being (gains) and personality through mixed methods. </p> <p>The first paper (chapter 2) examined BPS’s long-term effects in improving participants’ overall well-being compared with the control group through a quasi-experimental design. Results from a 2 × 3 mixed ANOVA indicate that BPS did not significantly improve the participants’ well-being over time compared with the control group. In fact, the control group performed better than treatment one month after the intervention. This result aligns with findings of well-being during COVID-19. </p> <p>The second paper (chapter 3) measured BPS’s effect in improving preservice teachers’ attitudes towards technology integration. Even though the results show that BPS did not improve participants’ attitudes towards technology integration statistically significantly compared with the control group (possibly because of impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic), the results are promising because: first, inside the treatment group, the result shows BPS improved participants’ attitudes significantly; second, under the pandemic, literature reported that BPS was not as effective as in normal situations; however, the activities in the control group might be more effective under the pandemic.</p> <p>The third paper (chapter 4) explored novice instructional designers’ attitudes towards BPS and the relationship between attitudes, well-being, and personality. Pearson correlation results show significant correlations among attitudes, subjective well-being (gains), and openness to experience. In addition, the results from open-ended questions confirmed participants’ positive attitudes towards the BPS. Taken together, the findings from three papers contribute to the practical application of BPS in real-world class settings, especially under the unique pandemic situation. More studies are needed to explore the application of positive psychology interventions in instructional design in real-world settings.</p>

No description available.