Boating Decision-Making 259
In some situations, there isn’t always
time to make decisions based on analytical
decision-making skills. A good example
is a quarterback whose actions are based
upon a highly fluid and changing situation.
He intends to execute a plan, but new circumstances
dictate decision-making on the
fly. This type of decision-making is called
automatic decision-making or naturalized
decision-making.
Automatic Decision-Making
In an emergency situation, a PIC might
not survive if he or she rigorously applied
analytical models to every decision made;
there is not enough time to go through all
the options. But under these circumstances
does he or she find the best possible solution
to every problem?
For the past several decades, research
into how people actually make decisions
has revealed that when pressed for time,
experts faced with a task loaded with
uncertainty, first assess whether the situation
strikes them as familiar. Rather than
comparing the pros and cons of different
approaches, they quickly imagine how one
or a few possible courses of action in such
situations will play out. Experts take the
first workable option they can find. While it
may not be the best of all possible choices,
it often yields remarkably good results.
The terms naturalistic and automatic
decision-making have been coined to
describe this type of decision-making. The
ability to make automatic decisions holds
true for a range of experts from fire fighters
to chess players. It appears the expert’s
ability hinges on the recognition of patterns
and consistencies that clarify options
in complex situations. Experts appear to
make provisional sense of a situation, without
actually reaching a decision, by launching
experience- based actions that in turn
trigger creative revisions.
This is a reflexive type of decision
making anchored in training and experience
and is most often used in times of
emergencies when there is no time to practice
analytical decision-making. Naturalistic
or automatic decision-making improves
with training and experience, and a boater
will find himself or herself using a combination
of decision-making tools that correlate
with individual experience and training.
Operational Pitfalls
Although more experienced boaters are
likely to make more automatic decisions,
there are tendencies or operational pitfalls
that come with the development of PIC
experience. These are classic behavioral
traps into which boaters have been known
to fall. More experienced boaters (as a rule)
try to complete a cruise as planned, please
passengers, and meet schedules. The desire
to meet these goals can have an adverse
effect on safety and contribute to an unrealistic
assessment of boating skills. All
experienced boaters have fallen prey to, or
have been tempted by, one or more of these
tendencies in their boating careers. These
dangerous tendencies or behavior patterns,
which must be identified and eliminated.
Stress Management
Everyone is stressed to some degree almost
all of the time. A certain amount of stress
is good since it keeps a person alert and
prevents complacency. Effects of stress are
cumulative and, if the boater does not cope
with them in an appropriate way, they can
eventually add up to an intolerable burden.
Performance generally increases with the
onset of stress, peaks, and then begins to
fall off rapidly as stress levels exceed a person’s
ability to cope. The ability to make
effective decisions during boating can be
impaired by stress. There are two categories
of stress—acute and chronic.
Factors referred to as stressors can
increase a boater’s risk of error.
Environmental—noise, vibration, lack of
oxygen
Physiological—fatigue, sleet loss, missed
meals
Psychological—emotions, family problems
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142