517
1 INTRODUCTION
In the maritime industry, a substantial shift has been
observed with the advent of the technologies heralded
by the fourth industrial revolution. The maritime
industry, employing approximately 1.9 million
seafarers (IMO, 2022), has shown resilience and
adaptability in the face of these continuous shifts,
culminating in efficient and effective operations. For
example, traditional methods of manual navigation
employing instruments like the sextant have been
replaced by automated positioning systems, such as
Global Positioning System (GPS). This transition
underscores the profound and ongoing evolution of
the industry, driven by the digital and technological
advancements that characterize contemporary
industrial progress.
While these advancements offer promising avenues
for growth, it is incumbent upon researchers and
practitioners with vested interests in the well-being of
seafarers, to evaluate potential opportunities and
An Exploratory Study to Measure Sextant Technical
Skills in an Increasingly Digitalized Marine Environment
Y. Leclerc & F. Obeng
Fisheries and Marine Institute of Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, Canada
ABSTRACT: The fourth industrial revolution has ushered in a transformative era for the maritime industry,
marked by the increasing digitalization of vessels and the emergence of maritime autonomous surface ships
(MASS). While these technological advancements provide numerous benefits, they also present associated
challenges concerning the retention of conventional seafaring skills. Traditional tools such as the sextant—once a
core component of celestial navigation—offer a potential countermeasure against rising cyber threats targeting
satellite-based positioning systems. The current study explores the retention of sextant-related skills, focusing on
both declarative and procedural knowledge. This aim was achieved by assessing skill and knowledge retention,
and investigating the influence of specific variable (i.e., age, rank, years at sea, sextant use frequency) on skill
retention. A total of 34 active seafarers participated in this study, with ranks ranging from cadet to captain.
Participants were asked to complete two declarative tests (a written assessment of sextant components and
common calibration errors) and one procedural test (manual calibration of the sextant). However, participants
only completed the declarative tests, with none undertaking the procedural task. The analysis revealed no
significant relationships between sextant knowledge retention and variables such as age, years at sea, rank, or
frequency of sextant use. All tested correlations were weak and statistically non-significant. These findings are
important as they challenge common assumptions about experience and practice directly correlating with skill
retention. The results underscore the need for a reassessment of maritime training approaches to ensure the
continued competence in traditional navigation methods. This is particularly relevant given the maritime sector’s
increasing dependence on digital systems, highlighting the value of preserving manual navigation skills as a
critical backup in the event of technological failure.
http://www.transnav.eu
the International Journal
on Marine Navigation
and Safety of Sea Transportation
Volume 20
Number 2
June 2026
DOI: 10.12716/1001.20.02.25
518
challenges. This scrutiny must particularly encompass
the impacts that these disruptive technologies may
pose to the skillsets and training paradigms essential
for today's seafarers. For instance, maritime
professionals are relying heavily on technology and
automation to accomplish their regular tasks to the
detriment of critical skills that may be lost because they
are no longer taught or sufficiently practiced.
For centuries, the sextant has been the only
instrument onboard the ship that enabled seafarers to
navigate across the globe. Since the 20th century,
maritime organizations have been integrating
technology into their daily activities in a steady pace
with an emphasis on automation. However, the
automatic geo-positioning systems (e.g., satellites,
radiogoniometers, etc.) onboard ships have created
reliability concerns, including issues such as spoofing
and cyber- attack (Jafarnia-Jahromi, A., et al., 2012).
When these situations happen, seafarers need to be
able to rely on an unassailable system, such as the
sextant, that will ensure the safe and reliable
navigation.
The primary use of a sextant is to calculate the ship’s
position (e.g., latitude and longitude) by measuring the
angle between an astronomical object, such as the sun
or a star, and the horizon. Identifying the ship position
with a sextant requires specific theoretical and
technical training, as well as regular practice.
Generally, knowledge of an individual can be
distinguished as two main groups of knowledge:
declarative and procedural (Ferguson-Hessler, G. M.,
2020). Declarative knowledge establishes the ‘knowing
what’ and the procedural knowledge institutes the
‘knowing how’. Hence, when it relates to sextant
usage, a seafarer should have the minimum knowledge
of the sextant’s components (e.g., what) and how to use
the sextant (e.g., how). The goal of the research is to (1)
measure the retention of sextant skills, and (2) explore
the factors that may predict skill retention.
The measuring of skill retention was performed by
asking participants to complete two written
assessments to test their knowledge of the sextant and
its adjustable calibration test. Participants were also
asked, to perform a manual calibration test. Factors
that may influence skill retention were then
investigated by using multiple regressions of four
predictor variables (e.g., age, years at sea, rank and
frequency of usage of the sextant) on the two
dependent variables (i.e., score on general sextant
knowledge test and score on sextant calibration errors
test). The paper provides a review of the current
literature, a section on the method and results,
followed by a discussion on findings, and a conclusion.
2 LITERATURE REVIEW
This section presents a comprehensive review of key
areas relevant to this study: the current state of
seafarers’ training, particularly with respect to sextant
skills; theoretical frameworks on skill acquisition and
retention; and the complexity of onboard navigation
systems and their associated cybersecurity
implications. Together, these elements help
contextualize the challenges of maintaining traditional
navigation competencies in an increasingly digital
maritime environment.
2.1 Seafarers’ Training and Sextant Skills
The maritime industry depends on well-trained,
skilled seafarers to ensure safe, secure, and efficient
operations. The International Maritime Organization’s
(IMO) Standards of Training, Certification and
Watchkeeping (STCW) convention sets out minimum
international training standards, forming the
foundation for the development of training programs
worldwide (IMO, 2019). Among these, celestial
navigation is a core competency, particularly for
Officers of the Watch (OOW), who are expected to
demonstrate proficiency in using a sextant for
determining vessel position.
Historically, the sextant was a cornerstone of
marine navigation, used extensively to determine
position via celestial bodies. However, advances in
navigational technologies, particularly satellite- based
Global Positioning Systems (GPS), have rendered the
sextant largely obsolete in commercial practice. This
shift has been further reinforced by regulatory
flexibility, as the carriage of a sextant is no longer
mandatory on many commercial vessels (IMO-SOLAS
Chapter V, Regulation 19). As a result, opportunities to
practice and apply celestial navigation techniques have
dwindled, raising concerns about skill decay among
modern seafarers.
2.2 Theories of Skill Acquisition and Retention
To understand how and why traditional navigational
skills like sextant use may be eroding, it is important to
consider how such skills are acquired and maintained.
Bloom’s Taxonomy (Anderson, 2002) outlines three
domains of learning—cognitive, affective, and
psychomotor—all of which are engaged during the
learning and execution of complex navigational tasks.
Declarative knowledge (facts and concepts) and
procedural knowledge (how to perform tasks) are both
crucial for mastering sextant use. Over time, without
reinforcement or application, both types of knowledge
can deteriorate—a process known as skill decay (Kim,
2010).
The Dreyfus Model of Skill Acquisition (Dreyfus &
Dreyfus, 1986) provides additional insight, describing
how learners progress from novice to expert through
practical experience. Reverting to earlier stages of this
model is a real risk when specific tasks are no longer
performed regularly.
Research in cognitive psychology, such as
Anderson’s (1993) study of typing proficiency,
supports this notion by showing that procedural
knowledge, though generally more robust than
declarative knowledge, still requires regular use to be
maintained.
Barnett (2006) argues that automation in modern
maritime operations has relegated humans to
monitoring roles, accelerating the atrophy of manual
navigation competencies. Without regular use, the
"how" of navigation becomes less familiar, even if the
"what" (i.e., vessel position) is readily provided by
digital systems. Arthur et al. (1998) and Sanli and
519
Carnahan (2018) further affirm that structured practice
and periodic retraining are essential for skill retention,
especially in high- reliability sectors like maritime
transport.
2.3 Complexity of Navigation Systems and Cybersecurity
Implications
The modern bridge is a highly digital environment,
driven by sophisticated Electronic Chart Display and
Information Systems (ECDIS), integrated bridge
systems, and real-time data interfaces with shore-
based control. While these technologies improve
efficiency and reduce workload, they also introduce
new challenges, particularly regarding human–
machine interaction and cyber vulnerability (Lutzhoft
et al., 2002; WMU, 2019).
The Danish Maritime Authority (DMA, 2018) has
noted that while technological advancement is
embraced by vessel owners seeking competitiveness,
crew training often lags behind, particularly in
operationalizing new technologies. The disconnect
between technological capability and human capacity
increases the risk of system misuse or failure.
Cybersecurity has become a critical concern in this
digital transition. The UK Department for Transport
(2023) and other maritime authorities warn that ships
are increasingly vulnerable to cyberattacks due to their
dependence on interconnected navigation and
communication systems. Threats such as GPS spoofing
or system intrusions could have catastrophic
consequences, from grounding to loss of situational
awareness. Empirical studies have documented
incidents where vessels were unknowingly
misdirected or exposed to cyber vulnerabilities (Svilicic
et al., 2019).
Consequently, the preservation of traditional
navigational skills, such as sextant usage, has assumed
renewed significance as a redundancy measure and
risk mitigation mechanism. The retention of these skills
among seafarers is not merely a nod to tradition but a
calculated strategy to ensure navigational safety. In the
event of a digital failure or cyberattack, the capacity to
revert to manual navigation could be a critical lifeline,
offering a resilient countermeasure to the inherent risks
of the digital age.
The confluence of traditional wisdom and modern
innovation presents an intricate but essential balance.
It highlights the need for a robust cybersecurity
framework within the maritime industry and stresses
the importance of comprehensive risk management
strategies when it comes to critical knowledge and
skills. In this context, training programs must not only
prepare seafarers for technological proficiency but also
ensure the preservation of core manual navigation
competencies as part of holistic maritime
preparedness.
3 METHODOLOGY
Three knowledge tests were used to understand the
retention of sextant skills amongst seafarers. This
section describes the participants, the equipment used
in this study, and explains the methods used to test the
participants knowledge of the sextant. An explanation
of the data analysis is also provided.
3.1 Participants
The study recruited adult marine professional working
onboard commercial vessels who uses different types
of positioning systems for navigation as participants.
As part of the ethics approval process at Memorial
University, which requires all research involving
human participants to be reviewed by the
Interdisciplinary Committee on Ethics in Human
Research (ICEHR), formal permission was obtained
from the relevant port authority to carry out the study
on- site. Participant recruitment was conducted
opportunistically through the display of informational
posters and logistical support provided by the port
authority's designated office. The investigator went
onboard vessels and after approval from ship’s
captain, proceeded with individual interviews and
tested the participants in a dedicated quiet location
(bridge or dedicated room).
3.2 Equipment and Tools
The tools used for the study included: a demographic
survey, sextant declarative knowledge and procedural
tests.
The knowledge tests were developed considering
the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy (Anderson, 2002) and
its four categories of knowledge dimension: factual,
conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. The first
two tests were tailored to factual knowledge (e.g.,
declarative knowledge), while the third was the direct
usage of the sextant (e.g., procedural knowledge). A
sextant (as depicted in Figure 1) was provided by the
researcher to avoid situation where no sextant would
be available onboard and to ensure same equipment
was used by all participants.
The investigator evaluated the performance of
participants on the three tests to see if the results
aligned with the six (06) skills of the revised Bloom’s
taxonomy, where the first two tests were more a
remembering activity, and the third was the practical
application of knowledge (e.g. motor skills).
3.2.1 Operating the Sextant
The sextant (depicted in Figure 1) has been used at
sea for centuries for celestial navigation. The sextant
measures the angle between an astronomical object
and the horizon. The angles are measured using a
vernier that reads to a minute (e.g., 1/60 of a degree).
One minute error in the measurement is about one
nautical mile (or 1852 metres). Therefore, the best
possible accuracy is 0.1 nautical mile. A highly skilled
navigator can determine the vessel’s position using a
sextant to an accuracy of about 460 meters (Dunlap and
Shufeldt, 1972) which is satisfactory considering the
navigation constraints and limitations.
The sextant is sensitive to temperature variations as
any changes can deform the arc, creating inaccuracies
in the angle measurement and result in erroneous
estimation of the vessel’s position. This is why, before
any celestial observations, the sextant needs to be
adjusted by the operator. Due to its sensitivity, the
520
instrument should be checked frequently and the
mirrors adjustment to minimize the following issues:
the perpendicular error, the side error, and the index
error.
Figure 1. Sextant used for the study (source: investigator’s
own equipment).
3.2.2 Survey
The survey consisted of demographic questions and
questions related to the participant’s usage of the
sextant and other technologies onboard (e.g.
participant’s age, rank, years at sea, country of training
and frequency of usage of sextant). The survey also
asked three general questions pertaining to the
participant’s perception regarding the impact of
digitalization on their work.
3.2.3 Sextant Declarative Knowledge Tests
The sextant knowledge test was a written test that
asked the participants to identify the different parts of
the sextant and common adjustable errors. The
participant was first shown the picture in Figure 2
below and asked to identify the nine elements of the
sextant (e.g., the arc, the clamp, etc.) from a list of 14
names.
Figure 2. Image of the sextant that was labeled by
participants.
The second test involved the identification of the
sextant’s three adjustable calibration errors (e.g., the
perpendicular error, the side error, and the index error)
from a list of nine items. To assess the participants
recognition of the errors, the 3 correct answers were
placed in a list among 6 false errors such as the optical
error or the shade error.
3.2.4 Sextant Procedural Test (e.g. manual adjustment of
the sextant)
The third test was to ask participants to adjust the
sextant. For example, the participant would assess and
correct the three errors when calibrating the sextant. To
control for confounding variables, the sextant was
preadjusted with the same error for all participants
(e.g., 1 quarter turn anticlockwise on the index mirror).
3.3 Procedure and Data Collection
Interviews were conducted in designated locations on
board the vessel to ensure anonymity and quietness
(e.g., Bridge or meeting room).
Participants were first asked to fill in the
demographic survey/questionnaire. The second task
was to identify the different part of a sextant. A sheet
picturing a sextant with 9 arrows directed to specific
parts of the equipment, along with a list of 14
numerated elements, was provided to the participants
(see figure 2). The participants had to choose the correct
element corresponding to each arrow. The third task
was to identify the 3 adjustable errors of a sextant from
a list of 9 errors. Finally, the last task was for
participants to manually calibrate the sextant (e.g.,
procedural knowledge).
3.4 Data Analysis
The demographic survey responses were tallied and
the participants’ performance in the written tests were
scored. For both tests, participants received one point
for every correct answer (e.g., for instance a participant
that provided a fourth incorrect calibration error on top
of the 3 correct answers would receive 8 points out of
9).
Four predictor variables were identified from the
survey (e.g. age, rank, years at sea, and frequency of
usage of sextant age) on skill retention.) as potential
factors that may influence the participants test scores.
Regressions were performed to determine if there was
any correlation between the independent variables
(predictors) and the test scores as a measure of the
participants’ sextant knowledge (i.e., scores on sextant
knowledge test and sextant adjustable calibration test).
The analysis of data was conducted using SPSS.
4 RESULTS
The results section will present 1) the scores of the
knowledge test and adjustable errors test, 2) the
analysis of the predictor variables on the performance
scores and 3) look more closely at the time since last
used versus the scores as we assumed that the
performance would decay with less practices or longer
time since last usage, and 4) the responses from the
survey.
4.1 Demographic Information
A total of 34 active seafarers participated in the study
(see table 1). All participants were male and ranged in
an age from 21 to 68 years (M = 39.1, SD = 11.2). The
participants years at sea ranged from 0 to 40 years (M
521
= 14.4, SD = 10.2). Regarding rank, six participants were
cadets (n=6), five were 3rd mates (n=5), seven were 2nd
mates (n=7), eight were 1st mates (n=8) and eight were
captains (n=8).
In terms of training, all participants held STCW
certification. However, the participants were trained in
different countries including Iran (n=7), Bangladesh
(n=6), India (n-5), China (n=4), Philippines (n=4),
United Kingdom (n=2), Ukraine (n=2), UAE (n=2),
Russia (n=1), and Greek (n=1).
In their questionnaire, all participants reported
having received training on sextant and its usage
during their marine education. Also, it was interesting
to note that only one participant reported using the
sextant once a week and 12 participants reported using
the sextant once a month.
Table 1. Demographic statistics of the participants in the
study
Criteria classification
Frequency
Percentage
(%)
Age
7
20%
12
35%
15
44%
Years experience at sea
7
20%
1
3%
13
38%
13
38%
Gender expression
34
100%
0
0%
Rank
8
23%
7
20%
8
23%
5
15%
6
18%
Country of Training
6
17%
4
12%
1
3%
5
15%
7
20%
4
12%
1
3%
2
6%
2
6%
2
6%
Years since used Sextant
8
23%
13
38%
4
12%
5
15%
4
12%
Frequency of use of
Sextant
1
3%
12
35%
10
29%
11
32%
4.2 Performance Scores
All participants completed both declarative knowledge
tests, along with the filling out of the questionnaire.
4.2.1 General sextant components knowledge test
While all 34 participants undertook the test, only
one (01) individual got the nine correct responses and
twenty-one (21) got over 50% and more correct
responses (e.g. >= 5 correct responses).
Table 2. General sextant components knowledge test results
Criteria
classification
Statistics
Frequency
Percentage
(%)
Test Score
Sextant
Components
All correct (09)
1
3%
Correct 08
7
20%
Correct 07
1
3%
80% Correct
9
26%
Correct 06
6
17%
Correct 05
6
17%
>50% Correct
21
60%
Correct 04
2
6%
Correct 03
4
12%
Correct 02
3
9%
Correct 01
4
12%
< 50% Correct
13
40%
No Correct (00)
0
0
Correct Sextant
Components
The index Mirror Shades
22
65%
The Horizon Mirror
20
59%
The Horizon Mirror
Shades
18
53%
Vernier Scale
2
6%
The Index Mirror
22
65%
The Telescope
28
82%
The Frame
21
62%
The Arc
19
56%
The Index Arm
17
50%
4.2.2 Adjustable errors knowledge test
While all 34 participants undertook the test, only
four (4) individuals got the nine correct responses and
twenty (20) got over 50% and more correct responses
(e.g. >= 5 correct responses).
Table 3. Adjustable errors knowledge test results (* are the
three correct responses)
Test Score of
Adjustable Errors
All correct (09)
4
12%
Correct 08
2
6%
Correct 07
7
20%
80% Correct
13
38%
Correct 06
6
17%
Correct 05
1
3%
>50% Correct
20
59%
Correct 04
4
12%
Correct 03
0
0%
Correct 02
0
0%
Correct 01
0
0%
< 50% Correct
12%
Test non completed
10
29%
Correct Sextant
Components
The Graduation Error
12
35%
The Error of Perpendicularity*
24
70%
The side Error*
24
70%
The Shade Error
21
62%
The Centring Error
16
47%
The Index Error*
24
70%
The Error of Collimation
20
59%
The Optical Error
15
44%
The Tear on the rack and worn
18
53%
Also, it was interesting to note that 29% of the
participants handed back an empty sheet.
4.2.3 Sextant calibration manual test
All 34 participants declined to undertake the
manual calibration test of the sextant.
4.3 Predictors of Performance
The variables selected as possible predictors were
chosen as it was hypothesized that participants with
fewer years at sea would know less about the sextant
as they may have had less opportunities to use the
522
instrument. Accordingly, younger participants may
underperform on the knowledge tests compared to
older participants with more years at sea. The same
would apply to rank since older participants would
normally hold higher ranks. Further, it was
hypothesized that participants who disclosed using the
sextant more frequently would perform better on the
tests than the participants who reported less frequent
utilization of the equipment.
4.3.1 Years at sea and age
Based on our assumptions, we were expected to see
older participants which normally would have more
years at sea, perform better than younger ones with
fewer years on board vessels. However, the results
were inconclusive as Figure 5 shows no trend in
performance based on age or years at sea for both tests.
Figure 3. General Sextant Knowledge test results and both
age & years at sea.
For instance, in the general sextant knowledge test,
we can see older participants (e.g. mean of
approximatively 64) with more years at sea (e.g. mean
of approximatively 44) scored only 7 good responses.
hence underperformed younger participants (e.g.
mean of approximatively 32) with less years at sea (e.g.
mean of approximatively 10) who scored 9 correct
responses.
Figure 4. Adjustable errors test results and both age & years
at sea.
The second test showed that participants with
comparable years at sea (e.g. mean of approximatively
15) and age (e.g. mean of approximatively 37), scored
very differently (e.g. score of 9 and 5 correct responses).
4.3.2 Rank
Figure 5 shows no trend in performance based on
rank for both tests. For instance, in first test, 2nd
officers (e.g. score = 9), performed better than chief
officers (e.g. score = 6) and masters (e.g. score = 1).
For the adjustable errors test, 2nd officers (e.g. score
= 9), performed better than chief officers (e.g. score = 8)
and masters (e.g. score = 7).
Figure 5. General Sextant Knowledge/Adjustable errors tests
results and respondents Rank.
4.3.3 Frequency of usage
The first test shows no trend regarding the results
as participants using the sextant once a month
performed very differently with a score between 9 and
2. It is the same indication on the second test as
participants using the sextant once a month performed
very differently with a score between 9, 6 and 4.
Figure 6. General Sextant Knowledge/Adjustable Errors tests
results and Frequency of Sextant Usage.
4.4 Overall results
As far as correlation is concerned, the SPSS platform
provided the following results for both tests.
4.4.1 General Knowledge
4.4.1.1 Age
Model
R
R-
squared
Adjusted R-
squared
Standard error of the
estimate
1
,074
a
,005
-,026
2,480
The correlation between frequency of sextant usage
and age of navigation officers is a simple Pearson's R,
and is represented on the output as R (also known as
multiple R). In our case, it is 0.074, which represents a
weak, non-significant correlation because the p-value
is greater than 0.05.
4.4.1.2 Rank
Model
R
R-
squared
Adjusted R-
squared
Standard error of the
estimate
1
,163
a
,027
-,004
2,453
The correlation between the frequency of sextant
usage and the rank of navigation officers is a simple
Pearson's R, and is represented on the output as R (also
known as multiple R). In our case, it is 0.075, which
represents a weak, non-significant correlation because
the p-value is greater than 0.05.
523
4.4.1.3 Frequency of usage
Model
R
R-
squared
Adjusted R-
squared
Standard error of the
estimate
1
,163
a
,027
-,004
2,453
The correlation between sextant usage frequency
and navigation officer skill retention is a simple
Pearson's r, and is represented on the output as R (also
known as multiple R). In our case, it is 0.163, which
represents a weak, non-significant correlation because
the p-value is greater than 0.05.
4.4.2 Adjustable errors
4.4.2.1 Age
Model
R
R-
squared
Adjusted
R-squared
Standard error of
the estimate
Durbin-
Watson
1
,130
a
,017
-,030
1.671
.707
The significance value (0.277) is greater than 0.05,
which indicates that the correlation is not statistically
significant. In other words, there is insufficient
evidence to conclude that there is a linear relationship
between age and sextant adjustable errors.
4.4.2.2 Rank
Model
R
R-
squared
Adjusted
R-squared
Standard error of
the estimate
Durbin-
Watson
1
,094
a
,009
-,038
1.678
.830
The correlation table shows that the relationship
between the rank on board and the adjustable error of
the sextant is very weak and not significant. The weak
negative correlation (-0.094) suggests that there is not a
strong linear relationship between these two variables.
The significance value (0.335) indicates that this
correlation is not statistically significant, meaning that
there is not sufficient evidence to conclude that there is
a relationship between onboard rank and adjustable
errors of the sextant in this sample.
4.4.2.3 Frequency of usage
Model
R
R-
squared
Adjusted
R-squared
Standard error of
the estimate
Durbin-
Watson
1
,056
a
,003
-,044
1.683
.775
The correlation table shows that the relationship
between the frequency of use of a sextant and the
adjustable errors of the sextant is very weak and not
significant. The weak negative correlation (- 0.056)
suggests that there is no strong linear relationship
between these two variables. The significance value
(0.400) indicates that this correlation is not statistically
significant, meaning that there is not sufficient
evidence to conclude that there is a relationship
between the frequency of sextant use and the
adjustable sextant errors in this sample.
4.5 Survey Results
Participants were also asked survey questions to assess
their agreement/disagreement on aspects of maritime
digitalization and the adequacy of training for
sustainable transformation. Table 1 outlines the
participants responses.
Table 4. Survey on maritime digitalization
Questions
Responses (Percentage (%)
Strongly
Agree
Agree
Neutral
Disagree
1. Digitalization, automation and
AI will have impact on seafarers’
skill retention for sextant use
32.3
53.1
8.8
5.8
2. STCW training requirements
adequate for a more technical and
automated bridge?
11.7
67.6
14.9
5.8
3. IMO and States understand
impact of digitalization,
automation, and AI on OOW skills
8.8
70.5
11.9
8.8
Over 85% of participants (e.g. 32.3% + 53.1%)
acknowledged the impact of digitalization on the
retention of critical skills such as the usage of sextant.
Similarly, over 20% of participants (e.g. 14.9% + 5.8%)
expressed uncertainty on the adequacy of existing
STCW training.
5 DISCUSSION
The primary objective of this research was to assess the
retention of skills associated with the use of the sextant,
a traditional navigational instrument. The results
challenge several common assumptions regarding skill
retention, particularly the relationship between
experience, rank, and the frequency of sextant use.
Contrary to expectations, the data suggests that junior
officers, with fewer years at sea, outperformed senior
officers who had more extensive experience and
regular usage of the sextant. This unexpected finding
prompts further exploration of possible underlying
factors.
5.1 Years at Sea and Age
It was initially hypothesized that participants with
more years at sea would demonstrate better retention
of sextant-related knowledge due to their greater
exposure to the instrument. However, the results
revealed no clear correlation between age or years of
experience and sextant knowledge retention, as
illustrated by Figures 3 and 4. For instance, older
participants (mean age: approximately 64) with more
years at sea (mean: approximately 44 years) scored
only 7 correct answers on the general sextant
knowledge test, while younger participants (mean age:
32) with fewer years at sea (mean: 10 years) scored 9
correct responses. Similarly, on the adjustable errors
test, participants with similar years at sea (mean: 15
years) and age (mean: 37) showed considerable
variability in their scores, with one scoring 9 and
another scoring 5.
Possible Explanations:
− Infrequent Use: Despite their extensive experience,
older participants may not frequently use the
sextant, which has been largely supplanted by
digital navigation tools such as GPS and radar. As a
result, their traditional navigation skills may have
declined due to lack of regular practice, leading to
poorer test performance.
− Shift in Training Focus: Over time, maritime
training may have shifted its focus toward modern
technologies, diminishing the emphasis on
traditional tools like the sextant. Older officers,
524
accustomed to newer systems, may have had less
continuous engagement with sextant skills, despite
their years at sea.
− Learning and Cognitive Factors: Younger officers,
despite having fewer years at sea, may have had
more recent and focused exposure to sextant use
during training. This could result in fresher
knowledge and better retention compared to older
officers, who may have not used the instrument
regularly in recent years.
5.2 Rank
The assumption that higher-ranked officers (such as
chief officers and masters) would outperform junior
officers (e.g., second officers) did not hold true in this
study. Data from both tests, as shown in Figure 5,
demonstrated that second officers (mean score: 9)
outperformed chief officers (mean score: 6) and
masters (mean score: 1) on the general sextant
knowledge test. Similarly, second officers performed
better than their senior counterparts on the adjustable
errors test, though the difference was less pronounced.
These findings suggest that rank, typically associated
with experience, may not be a reliable predictor of skill
retention, especially for tasks requiring precision, such
as sextant usage.
Senior officers may have less frequent practice or
less direct engagement with traditional navigational
tools, which could impair their performance.
Possible Explanations:
− Continuous Exposure Among Lower-Ranked
Officers: Junior officers may still be actively
involved in traditional navigation tasks, including
sextant use, as part of their regular duties, while
senior officers may delegate these tasks or rely on
their experience. This higher frequency of
engagement could explain their superior
performance on the tests.
− Less Frequent Use Among Senior Officers: As
officers rise in rank, their responsibilities shift away
from routine navigation tasks, leading to reduced
hands-on involvement with the sextant. This lack of
regular practice may contribute to lower
performance in tests.
5.3 Frequency of Usage
The hypothesis that more frequent use of the sextant
would result in better skill retention was not supported
by the data. Participants who reported using the
sextant more frequently (e.g., monthly or annually)
displayed a wide range of scores on both tests,
indicating that frequency of use did not directly
correlate with higher performance. In fact, the results
from both the general sextant knowledge and
adjustable errors tests, shown in Figure 6, revealed
significant variability in scores among those using the
sextant once a month, ranging from a high score of 9 to
as low as 2. This variability suggests that regular
practice alone does not guarantee improved skill
retention. The disparities in results may also reflect a
lack of consistent, quality training or reinforcement of
sextant skills, which is essential for maintaining
proficiency.
Possible Explanations:
− Quality of Practice vs. Quantity: The effectiveness
of sextant practice may depend not only on
frequency but also on the quality and depth of
engagement with the instrument. If individuals are
not practicing in a way that emphasizes accuracy or
understanding the full range of the sextant’s
capabilities, regular use may not lead to stronger
retention.
− Shifting Priorities and Tools: As digital navigation
tools become more prevalent, even individuals who
use the sextant regularly may only do so in limited
contexts. This shift may hinder their mastery of the
sextant, leading to inconsistent performance in
tests.
5.4 Diminishing Skill Retention with Overuse
An interesting finding of this study is that participants
who used the sextant infrequently outperformed those
who used it regularly. Notably, only 3% of participants
used the sextant on a weekly basis, while 32% reported
not using it at all, 35% used it once a month, and 29%
once a year. These results suggest that excessive or
continuous use of the sextant may lead to diminishing
returns in skill retention. Officers who frequently use
the sextant may become overly reliant on it, neglecting
to engage with the finer skills required for precise
operation. Conversely, junior officers, who may use the
sextant less frequently, might maintain a sharper focus
during practice sessions, leading to better test
performance.
Possible Explanations:
− Cognitive and Learning Factors: Senior officers, due
to their extensive experience, may rely more on
procedural memory and automatic responses when
using the sextant. This reliance on ingrained habits
could limit their ability to actively engage with the
finer points of sextant operation, thereby reducing
their overall retention. In contrast, junior officers,
still actively learning, may engage more deeply
with the process, resulting in better retention of
detailed knowledge.
− Decline in Training and Practice: The study
highlights a critical gap in continuous skill
development, as a significant portion of
participants reported infrequent sextant use. With
only 3% using the sextant weekly and 32% never
using it at all, this lack of regular practice across all
ranks contributes to skill degradation. As a result,
even senior officers may struggle with sextant tasks
if they have not practiced regularly, which aligns
with the findings of lower performance among
senior officers.
5.5 Survey Results
The survey results provide further insight into the
concerns surrounding skill retention and the impact of
digitalization. Over 85% of participants (32.3% strongly
agree + 53.1% agree) acknowledged that digitalization,
automation, and AI would impact the retention of
critical skills such as sextant use. This highlights the
potential for digital technologies to disrupt traditional
navigational methods, making it even more important
to assess how well seafarers retain these skills.
Furthermore, over 20% of participants expressed
uncertainty about the adequacy of current STCW
525
training requirements, suggesting a need for updated
curricula that better address the challenges posed by
modern technology while maintaining traditional
skills.
− Digitalization and Dependency on Technology
The increasing reliance on digital navigation tools
may have contributed to the observed decline in
sextant-related skill retention, particularly among
senior officers. As technology advances, the focus
on traditional navigational methods such as sextant
usage has diminished, possibly explaining why
senior officers—who have become more
accustomed to digital tools—performed worse in
tests assessing their sextant proficiency. Junior
officers, by contrast, may have retained their skills
better, likely due to recent training that emphasized
traditional methods.
− Inadequacy of STCW Training
Finally, participants expressed concerns about the
adequacy of the existing STCW (Standards of
Training, Certification, and Watchkeeping) training
for maintaining traditional skills like sextant use.
The findings suggest that senior officers, who may
not have received continuous reinforcement in
traditional navigation methods, are particularly
vulnerable to skill degradation. The lack of
sustained practice and focus on sextant operations
in recent training programs may explain why
participants with fewer years at sea and less
frequent sextant use outperformed their more
experienced counterparts. This underscores the
need to reassess maritime training curricula to
ensure that essential traditional skills, such as
sextant operation, are adequately covered and
reinforced.
6 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS
The results are based on a sample of 34 participants
from 10 countries only. Also, the language barrier
might have also played a role in the findings as
participants were from different non-English speaking
countries.
Moreover, there are no regulatory requirements, as
the policies regarding the usage of sextant onboard
vessels are established by the compagnies. Over 73% of
participants declared that there was no policy
requiring the usage of the sextant on their vessels.
However, considering this internationalized domain it
would be interesting to undertake the same study on
board vessels where there is such policy (e.g. on sextant
usage) to compare results.
− Sample Size and Diversity: The results are based on
a sample of 34 participants from 10 countries only.
Hence, the sample size may not be representative of
the entire maritime community, and the
participants’ backgrounds (such as their specific
roles on different types of vessels) could have
influenced the results. A larger, more diverse
sample could provide more robust insights into
skill retention across different contexts.
− Self-Reported Usage Data: The reliance on self-
reported data for the frequency of sextant use may
introduce bias. Participants may overestimate or
underestimate their usage, leading to inaccurate
conclusions about the correlation between usage
frequency and skill retention.
− Cognitive Factors: The study did not account for
individual cognitive factors such as memory
retention, learning styles, and overall adaptability
to new technologies, which could play a significant
role in skill retention.
− Technological Advancements: The increasing
prevalence of digital tools in navigation may have
influenced participants’ attitudes towards sextant
use. This shift in technological reliance could have
affected the study's results, as participants may not
have fully engaged with the sextant or may have
been reluctant to return to traditional methods.
7 CONCLUSION
Technological advancements in maritime navigation
have undeniably revolutionized the field, resulting in
efficiency gains but also raising concerns over the
erosion of manual skills. The transition towards
automation aimed at reducing accidents, has
sometimes inadvertently stifled professional judgment
and traditional seamanship (Knudsen, 2009). The shift
in focus from human experience, good judgment, and
professional expertise towards automated procedures
and processes designed to minimize accidents is being
monitored within the maritime community (IMO,
2024).
Education centers in the maritime domain are
actively revising their curriculums to meet these new
challenges (Emad et al., 2022). Furthermore,
cybersecurity has emerged as a pivotal area of concern.
The seafaring sector's digital transformation has
introduced new vulnerabilities to cyber threats, as
highlighted by Geoff Brumfiel (2016). This new risk
profile underscores the ongoing relevance of training
in traditional navigational methods, such as the use of
the sextant.
In conclusion, this study highlights the complexity
of skill retention, particularly in the context of
traditional navigational instruments like the sextant.
Despite expectations, senior officers did not
consistently outperform junior officers, and frequent
use of the sextant did not directly correlate with better
performance. The findings suggest that a combination
of factors, including the quality of practice, the shift in
training priorities, and the cognitive engagement
during learning, may play a more significant role in
skill retention than previously assumed. Furthermore,
the rise of digital tools and the inadequacy of existing
training programs to address the retention of
traditional skills call for a re- evaluation of how
navigational skills are taught and maintained in the
maritime industry.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research was made possible through the support and
collaboration of many individuals and institutions. I would like to
express my deepest gratitude to the seafarers who participated in this
study, and to the port authorities who facilitated data collection. A
special acknowledgment is dedicated to the late Professor Heather
Carnahan, whose encouragement, insight, and mentorship were
instrumental in sparking my interest in the field and in pursuing
526
doctoral studies. Her passion for research, dedication to human
performance, and belief in my potential left a lasting impact. This
work is, in many ways, a reflection of her influence and guidance. It
is with deep respect and gratitude that I dedicate this contribution to
her memory. I am also thankful to Morgane Sheppard and co-author,
Dr. Francis Obeng, for their valuable support and collaboration, and
to the faculty at the Marine Institute of Memorial University for their
continued support.
REFERENCES
[1] Anderson, J. R. (1982). Acquisition of cognitive skill.
Psychological Review, 89 (4), 369-406.
[2] Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
[3] Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S. (2001).
A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A
revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives.
Longman Publishing.
[4] Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S. (2002).
A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A
revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives.
Longman Publishing.
[5] Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S. (2002).
Bloom’s taxonomy / Krathwohl, 2002. A Revision of
Bloom's Taxonomy: An Overview. Theory into Practice,
41(2).
[6] Arthur, W., Jr., Bennett, W., Jr., Stanush, P. L., & McNelly,
T. L. (1998). Factors That Influence Skill Decay and
Retention: A Quantitative Review and Analysis. Human
Performance, 11(1).
[7] Barnet, T. (2006). Barriers to progress or Windows of
Opportunity? A study in career path mapping in the
maritime Industries. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs,
5(2), 127-142.
[8] Brumfield, G., & Schofield, A. (2016). U.S. Navy Brings
Back Navigation By The Stars For Officers. NPR.
https://www.npr.org/2016/02/22/467210492/u-s-navy-
brings-back-navigation-by-the-stars- for-officers
[9] Danish Maritime Authority. (2018). Plan for Growth in
Blue Denmark (2018).
https://www.dma.dk/Documents/Publikationer/DetBlaD
anmark_A4%20_Indhold_UKpdf.pdf
[10] Dunlap, D. (1972). Dunton Navigation and Piloting (12th
ed.).
[11] Emad, G. R., & Ghosh, S. (2023). Identifying essential
skills and competencies towards building a training
framework for future operators of autonomous ships: a
qualitative study. WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs.
[12] Emad, G. R., Ghosh, S., & Azarhoushang, B. (2022). Re-
envisioning Maritime Education and Training –
Technology facilitated lifelong learning for future ship
operators. Proceedings of the International Association of
Maritime Universities Conference.
[13] Ferguson-Hessler, M. G. M. (1996). Types and Qualities
of Knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 31(2), 105-113.
[14] Fitts, P. M. (1964). Perceptual-motor skill learning. In A.
W. Melton (Ed.), Categories of human learning (pp. 243–
285). Academic Press.
[15] Flottau, J., Norris, G., & Schofield, A. (2011). Report Card:
Airbus A380 after Eight Years in Service. Aviation Week
Network. http://aviationweek.com/airbus-a380/report-
card-airbus-a380-after-eight- years-service
[16] International Maritime Organization. (2019).
International Convention on Standards of Training,
Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978.
https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/HumanElement/Page
s/STCW-Convention.aspx
[17] International Maritime Organization. (2022). Joint
statement urging continued collaboration to address the
crew change crisis, safeguard seafarer health and safety,
and avoid supply chain disruptions during the ongoing
COVID-19 pandemic.
https://unctad.org/system/files/non-official-
document/un-joint-statement-on-crewing-crisis_en.pdf
[18] International Maritime Organization. (2024, February
14). IMO lays groundwork for major review of seafarer
training standards.
https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/Pages/WhatsNew
-
2037.aspx#:~:text=The%20comprehensive%20review%20
aims%20to,of%20specific%20areas%20to% 20review
[19] Jafarnia-Jahromi, A., Broumandan, A., Nielsen, J., &
Lachapelle, G. (2012). GPS Vulnerability to Spoofing
Threats and a Review of Antispoofing Techniques.
International Journal of Navigation and Observation,
2012, Article ID 127072.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2012/127072
[20] Karwowski, W., Soares, M., & Stanton, N. (Eds.). (2005).
Handbook of Standards and Guidelines in Ergonomics
and Human Factors. Elsevier.
[21] Kim, J. W., Ritter, F. E., & Koubek, R. J. (2010). An
integrated theory for improved skill acquisition and
retention in the three stages of learning. Theoretical Issues
in Ergonomics Science, 11(1-2), 73-89.
[22] Endsley, M. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation
awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors.
[23] Salas, E., & Cannon-Bowers, J. A. (2001). The science of
training: A decade of progress. Annual Review of
Psychology.
[24] Dekker, S. (2006). The Field Guide to Understanding
Human Error. CRC Press – for systems thinking in
human-centered technology use.
[25] IMO (2021). Guidelines on Maritime Cyber Risk
Management – to provide updated regulatory context.
[26] Grech, M. R., Horberry, T., & Koester, T. (2008). Human
Factors in the Maritime Domain. CRC Press.
[27] Knudsen, F. (2009). Paperwork at the service of safety?
Workers’ reluctance against written procedures
exemplified by the concept of ‘seamanship’. Safety
Science, 47(2), 295-303.
[28] Lutzhoft, M. H., Nyce, J. M., & Petersen, E. S. (2002). On
Your Watch: Automation on the Bridge. Journal of
Navigation, 55(01), 83–96.
[29] Newsletters Riviera. (2015). Putting e-navigation into
practice will entail challenges. Riviera Newsletters.
https://www.rivieramm.com/opinion/opinion/putting-e-
navigation-into-practice-will- entail-challenges-36836
[30] Ritter, F. E., & Schooler, L. J. (2001). The learning curve.
In W. Kintch, N. Smelser, & P. Baltes (Eds.), International
encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (Vol.
13, pp. 8602–8605). Pergamon.
[31] Rittle-Johnson, B., & Alibali, M. W. (1999). Conceptual
and procedural knowledge of mathematics: Does one
lead to the other? Journal of Educational Psychology,
91(1), 175–189.
[32] Sanli, E. A., & Carnahan, H. (2018). Long-term retention
of skills in multi-day training contexts: A review of the
literature. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics,
66, 10-17.
[33] Shea, J. B., & Morgan, R. L. (1979). Contextual
interference effects on the acquisition, retention, and
transfer of a motor skill. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 5(2), 179–
187.
[34] UK Department of Transport. (2023). Cyber security
code of practice for ships.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/upl
oads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1171379/code
-of-practice-cyber-security-for-ships.pdf
[35] Van Hezewijk, R., van Loon, M., & Van Lieshout, M.
(1999). Procedural and declarative Knowledge: An
evolutionary perspective. Theory and Psychology, 9(5),
605-631.
[36] World Maritime University. (2019). Transport 2040:
Automation, Technology, Employment - The Future of
Work.