# The Impact of the Human Factor on Communication During a Collision Situation in Maritime Navigation
## 1 Introduction
### Analysis of the State of Knowledge  
For the safe passage of a ship, navigational information needs to be constantly exchanged and processed. The extent, reliability, accuracy, and perception of the information are all needed to make a correct decision. Ship navigators must use every available means and all available information to estimate navigational situations, such as the systems and equipment of the ship, including AIS, ARPA, and ECDIS, communication by voice, and different facilities. Obtaining additional information is provided by voice communication through communication channels, allowing for, where appropriate, coming to agreements. Maritime court decisions [11] and their analysis point to the fact that in the case of a collision, a lack of possibility of establishing communication by voice with other vessel was one of the allegations made against ships involved in sea accidents. Failure in establishing communication by voice, the misconduct of the communication, or a wrong understanding of the information thus transmitted could cause bad decisions. Such errors can be due to fatigue and stress, which, in turn, reduce mental resilience and personal safety, lower self-esteem and situational awareness, impair leadership qualities, and increase decision-making time. Errors may also result from poor English language skills. Besides difficulties in decoding messages at the semantic level, navigators may tend to express opposite opinions (polarization), point out problems without analyzing them (labelling), mix facts and conclusions, and stick to one opinion or judgement despite changing circumstances.  
Safe navigation at sea, particularly in the presence of traffic from other vessels, may require establishing contact a vessel or vessels in the vicinity. Direct automated communication between ships may reduce incidences of wrong decisions and said wrong actions  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Region** & **2010–2018** & **2019** & **2020** & **2013–2022** \\ \hline S. China, Indochina, Indonesia, and Philippines & 216 & 12 & 16 & 204 \\ Baltic & 136 & 1 & Data not available & Data not available \\ Japan, Korea, and N. China & 102 & 2 & 2 & 76 \\ British Isles, North Sea, English & 68 & 2 & 3 & 54 \\ Channel, and Bay of Biscay & 49 & 0 & 4 & 45 \\ Arabian Gulf and approaches & 36 & 3 & 3 & 34 \\ West African Coast & 38 & 0 & Data not available & 118 \\ East African Coast & 30 & 0 & 1 & 34 \\ Bay of Bengal & 24 & 2 & Data not available & 27 \\ Russian Arctic and Bering Sea & 23 & Data not available & 3 & Data not available \\ All other regions & 188 & 19 & 10 & 174 \\ The whole world & 910 & 41 & 42 & 766 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular} Source: authors’ research based on Allianz Commercial, Safety and Shipping Review 2023, copyright © 2023.  
\end{table}
Table 2: Global shipping losses by number of vessels by region, 2013–2022. Total losses, vessels over 100 gross tons.  
leading to maritime accidents. This mainly refers to dangerous situations requiring a decisive action to avoid a collision, i.e., close-quarters situations, where avoiding a collision requires agreed joint action by the navigators of the meeting vessels. These actions, called last-minute manoeuvres, are aimed at avoiding a collision or, when this is not possible, minimizing its consequences.