# Improving Human Ground Control Performance in Unmanned Aerial Systems
## 4 The Study
### Discussion and Implication  
The purpose of this study is to carry out predictions derived from the situation awareness of the team operating the ground control station that sharing displays between team members would improve team performance. The results show that the shared displays do not universally improve team performance, but they help to maintain performance in off-nominal situations. These results are discussed below.  
There was no overall visualization effect on team performance. Shared displays were predicted to cause better TSA than non-shared displays and thus lead to better team performance by controlling what information team members could easily access. The analysis of team communication clarifies the picture. Teams with unshared displays asked many more questions about the simulation. This implies that they integrated the limited information presented to them with the information aroused by the other team member. It is entirely possible that this allowed them to develop TSAs comparable to teams in shared conditions. This explanation of the results is interesting in that it supports the conjecture of [PERSON] et al. (2019) that states that the group process is an intrinsic part of situation assessment and development of the TSA.  
Unexpected events in the simulation reduced performance, showing that they had a measurable impact on the activity. This leads to the second interesting discovery, that performance deteriorated significantly when unforeseen events occurred in the \"Non-shared\" setting, more than in the \"Shared\" setting. The frequency of mission status questions demonstrated a similar interaction, implying that the team process offset the negative impact on TSA caused by the unshared view and an unexpected event.  
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline \hline  & **Number of Questions in** & **Number of Questions in** \\  & **Shared Setting Group** & **Non-Shared Setting Group** \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{_No Event task_} \\ \hline Team 1 & 3 & 2 \\ \hline Team 2 & 2 & 3 \\ \hline Team 3 & 2 & 2 \\ \hline Team 4 & 1 & 1 \\ \hline Team 5 & 2 & 4 \\ \hline Team 6 & 1 & 2 \\ \hline Team 7 & 2 & 2 \\ \hline Team 8 & 2 & 1 \\ \hline Team 9 & 1 & 2 \\ \hline Team 10 & 1 & 2 \\ \hline \multicolumn{3}{c}{_Event task_} \\ \hline Team 1 & 4 & 5 \\ \hline Team 2 & 3 & 6 \\ \hline Team 3 & 5 & 4 \\ \hline Team 4 & 4 & 6 \\ \hline Team 5 & 5 & 7 \\ \hline Team 6 & 4 & 6 \\ \hline Team 7 & 4 & 5 \\ \hline Team 8 & 3 & 6 \\ \hline Team 9 & 5 & 4 \\ \hline Team 10 & 4 & 7 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table}
Table 3: The number of questions among the team members (NQ) about the status of the mission.  
The implication of these results is that shared displays are particularly useful for performance in off-nominal situations. This experiment does not reveal how this effect occurs. It is possible that with shared displays there are more people who can see the status of the mission and therefore they are more likely to quickly detect an unexpected event. It may be that with a good TSA they are more able to get around the problem once it has been detected.  
Although the \"Shared\" setting demonstrated generally more advantages in situations involving sudden events, and it does not generate difficulties to operators in normal situations, it also reveals the need to have physical spaces enough large to allow collaboration among operators. Moreover, the experiment studied only the collaboration among two operators while in the wild there is also the possibility to have several operators collaborating at the same time. Thus, more investigation is needed in this sense.