Cockpit to Courtroom: The Case for Human Factors Experts
There are not a lot of books on the role of human factors in court, at least not many that I’ve found interesting or relevant, but the late William R. Uttal wrote several of the best. A few years back, I read Human Factors in the Courtroom, and recently, I’ve been pouring through Neuroscience in the Courtroom: What Every Lawyer Should Know about the Mind and the Brain. Uttal was a cognitive neuroscientist who studied the gap between physical events and human cognition—a gap that often distorts perception under stress. In Neuroscience in the Courtroom, Uttal emphasizes how our minds can "corrupt" reality, especially in high-stakes environments like aviation. His insights highlight a fundamental challenge in aviation accident cases: understanding how cognitive limitations affect perception and decision-making. For attorneys, this underscores the essential role of human factors experts who can bridge the divide between hard facts and human behavior in aviation legal cases.
When it comes to aviation accident cases, the testimony of experts well-versed in aviation and human factors can significantly influence courtroom outcomes. Neuroscience in the Courtroom argues that human cognition in relation to physical events is too intricate to be fully captured by simple laws or predictions. For lawyers, this suggests that specialized aviation experts who understand human factors must translate the cognitive aspects at play during accidents.
Uttal argues that no “bridging concept” links physical and cognitive laws. In other words, our mental processes don’t always align with how we expect things to work in the physical world. This disconnect is especially important in aviation cases where human perception and memory are tested under stress. Unlike the straightforward cause-and-effect in physics, human cognition introduces complexities that can cloud the details of an incident. Therefore, having an expert who can contextualize pilot behavior and decision-making within the framework of human factors is vital to courtroom accuracy and insight.
Uttal introduces the idea of "nonveridicalities" – the discrepancies between physical events and how we perceive them. For example, pilots under stress might misjudge distance, speed, or timing, even with years of experience. This distortion may not be a flaw in their abilities but rather an inherent limitation in human perception, especially under pressure. An expert in aviation human factors can clarify these cognitive discrepancies for a jury, translating complex cognitive concepts into clear explanations.
Uttal emphasizes the, pardon the pun, mind-boggling complexity of neural networks, making it nearly impossible to predict cognitive outcomes accurately. This idea applies directly to aviation cases, where a pilot’s split-second decisions under stress can’t be easily replicated or predicted. In court, a human factors or, for that matter, a subject matter expert can illustrate how these neural complexities affect decision-making, thus showing that a pilot’s actions in an accident scenario may stem from cognitive limitations imposed by stress, fatigue, weather, maintenance, or a myriad of other possibilities rather than negligence. Did “pilot pushing” or other factors put the aviator in an untenable position?
Finally, Uttal underscores the ontological tension between what exists and what we can know. This understanding is critical to achieving justice in aviation litigation. Even though certain cognitive processes and limitations exist, our understanding of their impact is often incomplete. Lawyers representing aviation accident cases should consider the value of an aviation expert who understands the law—someone who can bridge this knowledge gap, providing an explanation of the mental processes at play. Targeted Advisors Group is uniquely positioned to support legal actions where human factors expertise might be the difference between victory and defeat.
In aviation accident litigation, having an aviation expert familiar with human factors, law, and cognitive science can be the difference between a surface-level analysis and a deep-dive understanding of pilot behavior. William Uttal’s observations on cognitive science remind us that aviation accidents involve more than mechanical or physical causes; they often hinge on the complex realities of human cognition. For attorneys, leveraging this expertise can clarify the nuanced mental processes that underpin pilots’ decisions, thereby enhancing the credibility and effectiveness of their cases.
