Automation reduces pilot workload but introduces risks such as mode confusion and automation surprise, which can impair situation awareness and delay responses. Haptic shared control, delivered via active sidesticks, may mitigate these risks by providing continuous force feedback to convey automation intent and warnings. This study examined how the haptic information in shared control systems affects trust, workload, and awareness during automated take-off scenarios involving normal and abnormal autopilot behaviors. Twenty participants monitored automation performance while completing a secondary 2-back task under two shared control conditions: haptic shared versus input-mixing shared control. Results show that abnormal autopilot behaviors significantly increased workload and reduced trust, with haptic shared control having context-dependent effects - supporting trust and reducing workload during over-rotation but lowering trust in normal conditions. Haptic shared control had no significant effect upon participant situation awareness or secondary task performance. These findings suggest that the provision of haptic information within shared control can support pilots during automation anomalies but require human-centered implementation and training to avoid unintended effects under normal conditions.

Startle and surprise are known to potentially incapacitate professionals who respond to emergency situations. In the aviation domain, self-management methods to prevent such incapacitation have been introduced for pilots. This study aims to explore the relevance of similar self-management methods tailored for cabin crew, using subjective evaluation by cabin crew and cabin crew instructors. First, a method was designed and refined using interviews and a focus group with nine subject-matter experts, consisting of four steps: protect, reset, check and act. Second, relevance of the method was quasi-experimentally tested by letting 15 cabin crew members apply it in a simulated firefighting scenario. After performing the scenario, they rated whether the method had positive or negative effects, was difficult or easy to use, and they retrospectively rated their perceived stress before and after applying the method. Participants positively rated the method’s effectiveness and usability, and reported the method to significantly reduce perceived stress. Participants provided several suggestions for improving the method, and for approaches to integrate the method more effectively into existing protocols. The outcomes of this study provide direction on the design and use of self-management methods that can help manage startle and surprise in teams.