Pilots frequently encounter startle and/or surprise (S&S), which can negatively affect their performance. To investigate the types of non-nominal events that prompt S&S, 92 pilots from different fixed-wing operating backgrounds - commercial, military and general aviation - completed a survey. In addition to exploring the relative prevalence of different S&S events, the survey required participants to reflect on the level of stress and mental workload experienced during these events. They also rated the perceived effectiveness of any S&S management methods or techniques they may have implemented. Overall, 95% of the participants reported that they had experienced S&S events. Spatial disorientation and bird strikes caused the highest levels of stress. Aircraft system malfunctions, severe turbulence and automation surprises induced the highest workload. The respondents indicated that applying S&S management techniques helped relieve stress and mental workload. The perceived effectiveness of applying breathing-based techniques was significantly greater than other methods. However, despite regulatory recommendations, only 23% of participants were trained in breathing-based methods. The survey also asked participants to remark on their openness to adopt methods that are specifically tailored to expedite emotional and cognitive recovery from S&S. In this study, the Aviate-Breathe-Communicate (ABC) method was evaluated. Across a range of hypothetical S&S events, participants rated the ABC method as most useful in disorientation scenarios. The lack of time was perceived as the most significant barrier to applying this method in critical events. Additionally, participants rated the variability and unpredictability of their training; however, no significant relationship was found between these ratings and perceived stress levels during S&S events. These findings highlighted the need for improvement in S&S training programs and emphasised the recommendation of breathing-based techniques for managing acute stress in high-stakes situations.

A significant safety challenge airline pilots contend with is the possibility of experiencing startle and surprise. These are cognitive-emotional responses that may temporarily impair performance and that have contributed to multiple fatal loss of control events. Several self-management methods exist that are intended to facilitate recovery from startle and surprise, but these have only been tested in simulator experiments. The current study addresses this research gap by surveying the perceptions of 239 airline pilots on the utility and benefit of a method which they use in operational practice– the “Reset Method”. Overall, the survey results revealed that pilots felt the method improved mental preparedness, and reduced stress. A reported reason for not applying the method was the urge to act quickly. In addition, not all steps of the method were applied equally, and some pilots found the method difficult to fit into the existing procedures of several time-critical scenarios (e.g., aircraft upsets and emergency landings). We recommend training self-management methods in scenarios which carry the most risk of negative effects of startle and surprise. We also recommend instilling awareness of the ‘startle paradox': self-management techniques are most difficult to apply in situations where they are most beneficial. Method shortening and simplification may facilitate application. Future research should focus on refining the method's implementation, addressing the startle paradox, and understanding the transferability of startle and surprise management methods to other safety critical industries defined by complex sociotechnical interactions.

Startle and surprise can impair pilot performance and affect flight safety. This study investigates the prevalence of different startle and surprise events among helicopter pilots, its impact on pilot stress and mental effort and the influence of training background. It also looks at currently used startle mitigation strategies and evaluates the usability of a previously proposed “Aviate, Breathe, Check (ABC)” startle management method (Piras et al. 2023). A survey among 234 helicopter pilots revealed that 96% had experienced impactful startle or surprise events during operations. Scenarios such as disorientation, tail rotor incidents, and flight into instrument meteorological conditions (IMC) were considered particularly stressful. Reported levels of stress and mental effort during startle and surprise events did not differ between pilots with higher and lower experience levels or between pilots with a different training background (military or civilian). Only 38% of pilots indicated they were specifically trained to deal with startle and surprise and only 1% were trained to use a breathing technique. Most pilots (90%) expressed openness to implementing the ABC method and expected benefits from using it. Concerns regarding time constraints in critical situations emerged as the primary objection to adopting this technique. Overall, the findings indicate that the introduction of a startle management method tailored for helicopter operations could significantly enhance safety, especially given the higher accident rates compared to fixed-wing operations. Future research should focus on developing effective training protocols that account for the unique challenges of helicopter flying.

Startle and surprise can impair pilot performance and jeopardize flight safety. Self-management methods have been developed by the industry to address this acute source of stress, however, qualitative insights from pilots describing the quality of these methods are lacking. Ten semi-structured interviews with airline pilots, who had been taught a self-management method, were analyzed using thematic analysis). Pilots considered the method useful and reported positive effects (e.g., decrease in stress) when applying the method during operations. Pilots reported that the method was not often performed in full; specific steps were employed based on perceived benefit. Establishing fellow pilot status and situation awareness was considered most important, addressing own physical startle symptoms (e.g., muscle tension) were deemed less important. Pilots reported an urge to “act” rather than use the method, which is expected as the method aims to induce a pause and mitigate erroneous impulsi ve decisions. Barriers to applying the method included the difficult recognition of startle and surprise, and situational context. Suggested improvements for training dealt with recognition and sharing experiences from peers. The findings of the research provide directions for pilot training for startle and surprise. Future research will explore these pilot perceptions in a larger representative sample.