It came as a surprise when I read that most skydiving accidents happen among those who have a great deal of experience. The story I was reading went on to explain why, and it was because as someone gains experience, complacency tends to set in.
Maybe they don’t pack their parachute as meticulously as they should or pay close enough attention to any one of a hundred details before each jump. After some googling, I learned the phenomenon was called the “experience-confidence gap.”
Danish researchers back in 1979, Jens Rasmussen and Dr. James Reason developed what became known as the Rasmussen SRK model, which explains how experienced people make avoidable mistakes in their fields of expertise. They posited that humans operate in three ways: Knowledge-based, Rule-based and Skill-based.
The upward trajectory from novice to expert is backward from the acronym SRK, but at the knowledge-base level, novices exhibit slow, conscious thinking. At the rule-based level, intermediates follow procedures closely. At the top, the skill-based level, experts perform in fast and often subconscious ways.
The model holds that most accidents involving experts happen at the skill-based level. Because the expert is performing quickly on essentially a subconscious level — something akin to operating on auto-pilot — they may not notice a low-probability, high-consequence decision that a knowledge-based novice or rule-based intermediate would spot immediately.
By the time the parachute doesn’t open, the consequences are grim.
All of this came to me in a flash this morning when one of my dogs got lost. I walked them down to the beach as we do every morning, and I let them off leash so they could run around. The little pug-beagle mix, Dutch, ran back up the beach because he spied another regular on the beach walking her dog. She always has a pocketful of the tastiest dog treats, so he always runs toward her when he sees her.
He has done that a hundred times before, so I kept throwing the ball for our golden retriever so she could get her exercise. We were both walking in the same direction, and I knew that we would walk faster, turn around first, then walk back in the other direction and catch up with Dutch and the lady with all the treats.
Dutch had other plans, because he wandered away from the lady and farther up the beach in the other direction. I had him in sight, stopped to chat with some neighborhood friends, and when I looked up again, Dutch was gone. My wife wasn’t with me that morning, and it likely would not have happened if she were.
Even though we had been through the same routine a hundred times before, I didn’t recognize the low-probability, high-consequence decision of not paying close enough attention to his whereabouts. The parachute didn’t open. Dutch was a lost dog. Cue the Sarah McLachlan music.
Of course, the same paradigm applies to HPDE, Time Trial and racing. As you might imagine, HPDE drivers rarely make high-consequence mistakes because they are operating from the knowledge-base level. Slow, conscious thinking.
It is when we have garnered substantial experience that we begin to pay less attention to the risk involved in what we are doing because we have done it safely so many times before. At that moment, we are dead-center in the experience-confidence gap. I have been in that position, and now I know why and how things happened the way they did.
What we can learn from skydivers — and a recalcitrant dog — is to recognize and understand how and why simple mistakes turn into consequential blunders. HPDE, racing and Time Trial have inherent risks, regardless of the amount of experience we have. That’s why so many experienced drivers and race teams and pilots use checklists every time they suit up. It keeps us from rushing subconsciously through details that ultimately matter.
That means checking lug nut torque, belts, fluids, harnesses, driver cooling, and other important details. It means checking fundamentals like whether there is enough gas in the car, if you tightened the radiator cap, and knowing your helmet strap is fastened properly. Details that ultimately matter.
By now, you’re probably wondering what happened to Dutch, and I am happy to report that after about a half hour of looking, my wife found him about a mile away from where he got lost. A local guy found him and called the number on his tag.
I don’t think I need to use a checklist to walk the dog, but we will be reverting to rule-based model in which we follow procedures. The consequences of doing otherwise are too grim.
Great writing. The same line of thinking applies to new first time drivers. Like so many youngsters, including myself, at first, they are all conscientious, careful drivers, eyes wide open, looking directions, obeying the speed limit, etc. But with confidence, comes a relaxed state, and before we realize what we’re doing, we’re watching the radio as we select different stations, we’re busy talking with our friends, and the distractions began. Before we realize it, here comes a car turning right in front of us and therein lies our first accident. Over the years I can’t even guess how many times I have teased parents when they have told me their child just got their drivers license, and I asked them if it will be a week two weeks or months before their first accident. If they’re lucky, they’ll just experience a close call which is opening enough, that once again they will realize the importance of staying focused.