Half of Dead Divers on Their First 20 dives

[Quero]

Andy I would agree to a "weak version" of your hypothesis that psychological unpreparedness is an important factor in accidents involving inexperienced divers, but would like to offer my own caveat regarding what you see as a lack of assessment of that preparedness in the certification process.

OW certification prepares divers to execute unsupervised dives in conditions similar to those they experienced in their training. If a diver's entire training has been from shore in fresh water, then that is what s/he has been prepared to do without supervision. Similarly, if a diver's entire training has been in warm water from a boat, that is what s/he has been prepared to do without supervision. If newly certified divers stick closely to what they have experienced while on supervised dives as they plan and execute independent dives, the psychological stress factor should be largely attenuated. But if that lake diver wants to jump off a boat on the Great Barrier reef, s/he should do so under supervision, and if that warm-water boat diver wants to do a shore dive into a kelp forest in northern California, s/he should do so under supervision as well.

In other words, if OW divers wish to extend their limits beyond their initial training, they should undertake supervised dives in order to gain the necessary new experiences before planning independent dives in these unfamiliar conditions. The dives carried out with the intent of gaining specific experience may or may not be part of a course, and the supervising diver may be a more experienced mentor or an instructor. Once these divers have grasped the main points of the new dive experiences and are comfortable within the newly expanded limits of their experience/training, they should be able to plan and execute similar dives without supervision and without undue psychological stress.

 

[DevonDiver]

Once these divers have grasped the main points of the new dive experiences and are comfortable within the newly expanded limits of their experience/training, they should be able to plan and execute similar dives without supervision and without undue psychological stress.

I agree with your post - it makes very valid points.

However, psychological stressors are not just environmental. Some can be situational...and result from unforseen incidents happening within otherwise familiar scenarios.

One of the psychological factors that I was referring to earlier was over-confidence, which stems from an inability to reconcile an accurate self-appraisal of personal capability into an effective risk assessment. This is the underlying failure that allows some novice divers exceed those 'limits of training and experience'. The recreational OW courses are tailored to be stress-free 'happy' experiences - that essentially 'shield' the student from any potential issues, or discussion of them.

In addition to creating naive over-confidence in some students, this 'shielding' can also create a situation where the student fails to develop the necessary psychological self-control to deal effectively with stressful incidents.

The student ends entry-level training with a certification and the skills/knowledge applicable to the environment and activities in which they were trained in. But they do not possess the psychological preparedness for effective application of those skills in an emergency scenario.

 

[Subcooled]

You have 1000 regular / hobbyist divers and then you have 100 000 vacation divers that take OW on a holiday, dive five times, and then dive maybe five times a year. If fatal accidents would happen eaqually to all, then "inexperienced divers" would have 100 times the fatality rate because they are so many.

The statistic are "persons/year" not "% of OW" versus "% of RD"

-> It takes a mathematician to understand statistics <-

 

[Damselfish]

That statistic may be a bit skewed as the "20 dives or less" group represents a large portion of the diver population. Our local instructor said that 90% of those he certifies are not diving a year later. And, Florida is a diving state.

If half the divers out there have 0-20 dives, and they have half the fatalities, is that unexpected?

More useful statistics would have the probability of a fatality for each dive for a 0-20 dive person compared to a 20-40 dive person, etc.

You have 1000 regular / hobbyist divers and then you have 100 000 vacation divers that take OW on a holiday, dive five times, and then dive maybe five times a year. If fatal accidents would happen equally to all, then "inexperienced divers" would have 100 times the fatality rate because they are so many.

The statistic are "persons/year" not "% of OW" versus "% of RD"

This is my thinking. DAN statistics often seem to be high on absolute numbers and low on useful percentages. Actually most dive statistics are like that, because all the numbers needed to say that often aren't available.

 

[Quero]

I agree with your post - it makes very valid points.

However, psychological stressors are not just environmental. Some can be situational...and result from unforseen incidents happening within otherwise familiar scenarios.

One of the psychological factors that I was referring to earlier was over-confidence, which stems from an inability to reconcile an accurate self-appraisal of personal capability into an effective risk assessment. This is the underlying failure that allows some novice divers exceed those 'limits of training and experience'. The recreational OW courses are tailored to be stress-free 'happy' experiences - that essentially 'shield' the student from any potential issues, or discussion of them.

In addition to creating naive over-confidence in some students, this 'shielding' can also create a situation where the student fails to develop the necessary psychological self-control to deal effectively with stressful incidents.

The student ends entry-level training with a certification and the skills/knowledge applicable to the environment and activities in which they were trained in. But they do not possess the psychological preparedness for effective application of those skills in an emergency scenario.

You do have a point. However, the OW training we provide is not meant, in my view, to 'shield' students from any knowledge or discussion of unforeseen situational issues. I certainly discuss them, and I'm confident that you do too! I tell my students that much of what we cover in our OW course aims to prepare them primarily to avoid getting into trouble, but also of critical importance, aims to give them strategies to deal with unforeseen issues underwater whenever possible rather than shooting to the surface to try to solve them; and when it's not possible to solve the problem underwater, students are taught contingency procedures for surfacing as safely as possible with a mind to avoiding serious injury.

Most unforeseen situational emergencies encountered by OW divers are not actually unforeseeable, at least by those of us in a position to guide student divers in their education. We do, in fact, train divers to cope with the so-called unforeseen circumstances of an out-of-air emergency, entanglement, loose tank bands, overexertion, leg/foot cramps, flooded mask, and other commonly encountered situational stressors. It's true that we don't discuss the panic cycle or teach complex rescue skills such as in-water rescue breathing until the Rescue Diver course, but the foundation is laid when we teach students to 'Stop, Breathe, Think, Act' (in the parts of the curriculum that PADI terms 'Solution Thinking Underwater' in Module 3), and also when we teach divers how to assist distressed divers on the surface, with the emphasis (including on the exam) on the first step of establishing buoyancy for the distressed diver, and then teaching tows.

My point is that it's not all black and white with the notion that we only provide OW dive students motor skills work with no attention paid to the psychological aspects of diving. We are meant to prepare students to deal with both environmental and situational conditions with their attendant stressors--we teach environmental ones by actually conducting dives in a particular environment, but we teach the situational ones less directly, going over and over skills and repeating to students the value of these skills in a real-world situation that could very well involve stress.

As for over-confidence, I doubt that's something we instill in students as an artifact of the 'diving is fun' approach to instruction. I believe instead that the great majority of our students have a healthy respect for the risks involved and only cautiously step beyond their training limits. But I also believe that risk-taking behaviour and pushing limits is a facet of some divers' personalities that may not be eradicated as hard as we try; these divers are the truly naive ones--they naively think they're so in control that they're bullet-proof. (As an extreme example, I'm sure you remember the threads with the OW diver who was so sure he was ready for solo diving. Others may not be as outrageously reckless, but certain personalities are bound to push the limits regardless of what we teach.)

Anyway, I consider that what we are each saying is complementary rather than contradictory. I really appreciate reading your your insights, Andy.

 

[Jim Lapenta]

This one of the reasons why I not only teach the panic cycle and how it relates to different scenarios repeatedly during OW classroom training but also use increased task loading throughout the pool training to reinforce the idea that there are very few situations that can result in panic for a properly prepared diver. For the diver who has minimal time in the pool to just get the basic skills down and little or no time to actually practice and drill with those skills I'd say there are quite a few.

How many of you also address the emotional aspects of changing dive conditions on a new diver? No experience in current- ok kinda stressful, but taught to evaluate conditions, develop a plan independent of the DM's as a backup, and realize that there is no shame in calling the dive, much of that stress is removed. Perhaps enough to allow the diver to approach the dive safely without the added distraction of fear.

I have felt for a long time that pro level training should include a measure of learning to judge and deal with student emotional issues. Many of the difficulties students have ( at least mine anyway) are not tied to physical ability or lack of mental capacity. More of them are tied to emotional responses to the new activity. Deal with and overcome or even incorporate the emotional issues as part of the training process and students progress faster. With a increased degree of confidence.

I first began to consider this when I had a couple tell me that the amount of communciation I required from them as a team in an AOW course strengthened their marriage. There were alot of emotional issues with confidence, trusting the others ability, and knowing to what degree they could rely on each other in a new environment - the marriage was good just a few new factors to deal with. Given enough information and the proper skills all of those were overcome.

But it takes time to evaluate and assess these things. Using different approaches to the same skill and in an AOW that's tough. In OW for me it's relatively easy. Lots more time, more interaction, and that is where the shorter courses fall down IMO. I can teach skills in 4 hours sure. But skills taught without time to actually apply them and more important combine them under different task loads don't seem to really mean much.

In addition there is so much more info the avg student could be given if the time was taken, and time given to absorb that info. As it is now I'd be willing to bet that many of those weekend wonders would be hard pressed to recall much of the info they recieved 3 months later. I;d also bet that most of mine could and in fact do. I see it when they come for refreshers and just in conversation. Those are also the divers most likely to continue diving.

The excuse given that they will dive with a DM keeping them safe is nothing but utter BS. I hope that the conscientious instructor is teaching their student to never rely on a DM or any other pro unless specifically hired for that purpose. And if they do NEED to hire one as opposed to just wanting one why in the world did they receive an OW card. Better they get the new "Supervised Diver" or as it appears "need to be babysat because I might kill myself due to not knowing squat" card. As was already stated- some people just should not be diving. Those that do need to get all the info they can as early as they can and it begins in the OW class.

 

[DevonDiver]

I think Quero and Jim illustrate perfectly how the issue of psychological preparedness can be initially addressed at entry-level. Sadly, I don't think most instructors either recognise or address that issue. Neither do the agencies.

It'd be great if the PADI OW manual had a section on 'Panic' (including the panic cycle). It would also be great if the instructors were instructed to ensure that the students had adequate 'panic control' as a certification standard... but the emphasis of course standards is entirely focused on the repetition and 'mastery' of set skills.

An OW course may highlight the need to 'dive only within the limits of training and experience', but the materials (and consequently, most instructors) do not explain why those limits are critical to the novice diver. Neither do the course standards place any obligation on the instructor to certify a student based on their undertanding of this... or their mindset, which will determine if they are likely to follow this.

An OW course may reiterate what a safe ascent speed is, but the materials (and consequently, most instructors) do not explain why those limits are critical to the novice diver. Neither do they have any form of assessment to ensure that a student is capable of following these limits when under stress.

 

[emoreira]

What's the average number of dives required for an AOW? Less than 20, probably.

At least for SSI, the number is 24.

 

[Blackwood]

IMHO, the death of novice divers stems primarily from psychological issues, which pre-dispose the diver to a critical skill failure. These may include:
Linked to these psychological factors are a number of key weaknesses, that reflect the state of the novice divers' training and experience:

1) Increased tendancy to panic.
1) Inexperience leading to under-assessment of risks, which causes the diver to enter situations that they cannot deal with if an emergency occurs.

2) Inability to control panic.
2) Inexperience leading to over-assessment of risks, which creates a high degree of stress and increased likelihood of panic.

3) Panicked mental state leading to abandonment of effective dive procedures.
3) Inability to assess personal capability, in relation to dive requirements.

4) Over-confidence leading to unsafe diving practices.
4) Emergency skills not sufficiently 'ingrained' to be reliable under pressure.

Note: I re-ordered your post to make it easier for me to absorb.

Good observations. Again I wonder what it means for the novice diver in the context of this thread. Should he not be diving unsupervised until after his twentieth dive? And what type of supervision are we looking for?

For example, does following a divemaster around the reef in Cozumel constitute "being supervised"? Or should be we looking for a more pro-active role, e.g. that of an instructor teaching, for example, that information from the rescue course you mentioned later on?

 

[TSandM]

I think there are some diving environments which are simply inherently stressful. Four immersions in Puget Sound's cold, green murk are not enough, I think, for most people to feel truly COMFORTABLE in that environment. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if most divers who dive here have a higher level of tension at the beginning of a dive. The only way to deal with this, as a novice, is to keep OTHER, avoidable stressors to a minimum -- to do easy dives in familiar settings where water conditions (eg. current) do not add to the stress.