Perhaps more instructional time needs to be spent "loading pilots up".
We have all been in situations when events are in danger of over taking us. The article expounds that it is how the pilot reacts in these situations that can make the difference between life and death.
Of course this is relatively easy to do in the simulator, which is maybe one reason why the "professional" pilot is able to perform better. I spent three hours in one of the Airbus simulators recently; it was most impressive to see how many different scenarios could be presented, and I know I only scratched the surface of the scenarios the professionals experience.
Another reason could be that there is a SOP for most scenarios, so if the SOP is learnt and reproduced there is a good chance that the pilots will play out the best sequence of events to result in the best solution to the problem.
You may have seen the BBC's recent analysis of the Air France tragedy last year over the Atlantic. I found it interesting that despite it being a SOP how many pilots failed to advance the throttles quickly when presented with a failure of the ASI. The suggestion was the Air France pilot were so over loaded with mutliple failures that they may have failed to take the single action that could have saved the aircraft. Under pressure did they suffer from the same inability to prioritise that the article suggests is the single most significant contributor to accidents?
We in GA are not so lucky. It is difficult for instructors to "simulate" events in real life that could over load a pilot and see how the pilot reacts. Never the less some instructors are able to achieve this.