arbiter
JournalsPricingAccount

Measuring Situation Awareness: A Meta-Review Across Domains

Laura Louise Moens et al.

Human Factors2026https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208251412110article
AJG 3
Weight
0.50

What the paper says

ObjectiveTo 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.BackgroundSeveral 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.MethodFive 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.ResultsFourteen 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.ConclusionThe application of SAGAT may be recommended as best practice currently, while other tools offer complementary strengths for specific contexts.ApplicationThis 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.

Open paper page →

Cite this paper

https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208251412110

Or copy a formatted citation

@article{laura2026,
  title        = {{Measuring Situation Awareness: A Meta-Review Across Domains}},
  author       = {Laura Louise Moens et al.},
  journal      = {Human Factors},
  year         = {2026},
  doi          = {https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208251412110},
}

Paste directly into BibTeX, Zotero, or your reference manager.

Flag this paper

Measuring Situation Awareness: A Meta-Review Across Domains

Flags are reviewed by the Arbiter methodology team within 5 business days.

Evidence weight

0.50

Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40

F · citation impact0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20
M · momentum0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07
V · venue signal0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03
R · text relevance †0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20

† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.