Measuring Situation Awareness: A Meta-Review Across Domains

TL;DR

This paper reviews how situation awareness is measured across different fields, highlighting best practices and limitations of current tools.

Contribution

It synthesizes findings from multiple systematic reviews to provide practical guidance for measuring situation awareness.

Findings

Fourteen reviews were analyzed, identifying 38 SA measurement tools across four categories.

Probing techniques like SAGAT showed the most validity evidence but had usability issues.

Recommendations balance methodological rigor with practical feasibility for diverse contexts.

Abstract

To identify and interpret evidence from systematic reviews of Situation Awareness (SA) measurement across domains, focussing on measures’ psychometric properties, and provide practical implications for SA measurement.

Several systematic reviews have been published on SA measurement, often focussing on specific measurement tools, domains, or psychometric properties. This creates a challenge for understanding the evidence supporting SA measures and for establishing best practice in SA measurement.

Five electronic databases were searched up to February 2025. The meta-review was prospectively registered (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42024521458). Reviews were included if they were systematic and focused on SA measurement. Data were extracted on the review characteristics and the SA measurement tools identified, including their psychometric properties. Studies were assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist for systematic reviews.

Fourteen reviews, capturing over 477 unique primary studies, were included in this meta-review. In total, 38 distinct SA measurement tools were identified and subdivided into four categories of SA measurement: self-ratings, observer ratings, probing techniques, and physiological metrics. Psychometric evidence was limited for most tools. Probing techniques, especially the Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique (SAGAT), showed the most extensive validity evidence but were associated with usability concerns.

The application of SAGAT may be recommended as best practice currently, while other tools offer complementary strengths for specific contexts.

This synthesis provides guidance on best practice for SA measurement based on measurement purpose and context of use, balancing methodological rigour with feasibility to enhance SA measurement across diverse operational environments.

Figures