10:15 - 11:15 Presentation Session 1
1-1 |
Kerstan Cole, Elizabeth Schmidlin; Texas Tech University, and Francis Durso; Georgia Tech University |
Route familiarity impacts driver's situation awareness |
||
|
Background: Method: Results: Discussion: | ||||
1-2 |
Allyson Hall and Keith Jones; Texas Tech University |
Distance estimation training: A proposed model of training and transfer |
||
|
Distance estimation is a pervasive problem that occurs in a variety of environments. In order to improve one s ability to estimate distance, training protocols have been implemented. However, past research concerning the effects of distance estimation training on subsequent task performance has produced mixed results. After reviewing the current literature in distance estimation training and transfer, it is not surprising why the findings are so varied. Specifically, researchers in this area have implemented a plethora of training protocols, using a diverse range of feedback types, training and transfer tasks, distance types, and environments. Generally, feedback can be categorized into two main types, intrinsic and extrinsic. Intrinsic feedback is information that trainees pick up directly from the environment by performing a given action (e.g., optic flow or proprioceptive), while extrinsic feedback is performance information provided to the trainee by means of an outside source (e.g., metric, relative, or graphical; Mohler, et al., 2006). Additionally, training and transfer trials have utilized an assortment of distance estimation tasks, including metric verbal estimates (Gibson, Bergman, & Purdy, 1955), blindwalking (Richardson & Waller, 2005; 2007), and throwing (Jones et al., 2006; Hall et al., 2007) to various objects or targets. Moreover, these distance estimations have been performed on egocentric and exocentric distances, within virtual environments (Richardson & Waller, 2005; 2007), in the real world (Mohler et al., 2006; Waller & Richardson, 2008), and while using night vision goggles (Reising & Martin, 1994; 1995). As a consequence of the diverse combinations of feedback, task, distance, and environmental manipulations, the collective result of these studies produces a tumultuous mix of transfer effects of feedback training on distance estimation. In other words, reliable statements regarding the conditions withi n which transfer will occur are limited at best. Unfortunately, no attempt has been made to organize these various research endeavors in a way that will enhance understanding of the deep structural characteristics and mechanisms that may be present across these studies which may contribute to results in a given circumstance. Consequently, generalization and application of these mixed findings to real world situations is limited. As a solution, a training and transfer model was created. Model creation consisted of first, reviewing relevant literature in distance estimation training. Second, the information was organized based on type of training task, feedback, transfer task, and level of transfer. Next, the authors examined the organized materials and extracted relative surface and deep structural similarities and differences between studies that did and did not result in transfer. Based on this examination, a model was generated that blueprints and provides possible explanations for why particular training protocols are most likely to lead to differential levels of transfer. Overall, the model is an attempt to foster a better understanding of the effects of particular forms of feedback and training protocols on post-training performance. Furthermore, a goal of the model is to highlight specific areas in distance estimation training research that need further investigation. | ||||
1-3 |
Elizabeth Schmidlin, Keith Jones; Texas Tech University, Brian Johnson, United States Navy |
If the bot fits drive it? Judgments of pass-ability vs. drive-ability |
||
|
Recently there has been an increased use of tele-operated robots in search and rescue operations, especially when the environment is too dangerous for a human or dog to explore (Burke & Murphy, 2004). Though the immediate problem of danger to human rescuers is reduced with such robot use, another problem is introduced. Human operators get search and rescue robots stuck, which disrupts the search and rescue task. Why this happens, however, is unclear. It has been suggested that perhaps operators attempt to drive through apertures that are larger than the robot, but too small to be driven through unfettered. The results of Jones and Johnson (2008) supported that possibility. They found that tele-operators accurately judged whether a robot would fit through an aperture. However, those same tele-operators routinely drove into the sides of apertures that were wider than the robot. Given these results, Jones and Johnson (2008) suggested that operators should base wheth er to enter an aperture on their abilities to drive the robot through apertures (drive-ability), rather than the apertures physical dimensions (pass-ability). This suggestion assumes however, that operators are able to accurately determine if they can drive a robot through a given aperture. The present study was conducted to investigate that possibility. For each participant, seven trial blocks were completed. During each trial, participants a) viewed an aperture via a camera mounted on the robot, b) drove the robot toward the aperture, c) judged whether the robot could pass through the aperture (pass-ability) or whether they could drive the robot through the aperture (drive-ability), and d) tried to drive the robot through the aperture. During each block, participants completed these four activities for fourteen apertures that varied in width. Within a given set of apertures, five were wider than the robot, and five were narrower than the robot. The remaining four apertures were filler, which were randomly selected repetitions of certain wider and narrower apertures. These fillers varied the proportion of wider and narrower apertures across blocks. This discouraged participants from answering no because they had already said yes five times, and there were only five yes responses per block. The current research replicated the results of Jones and Johnson (2008). Specifically, participants made accurate pass-ability judgments but frequently drove the robot into apertures. It was this pattern of results that led Jones and Johnson (2008) to conclude that operators must base their decisions to enter an aperture on their ability to drive that robot, rather than the robot s physical dimensions. However, the present study found that participants made inaccurate drive-ability judgments. These results suggest that without training or improved interfaces operators may be incapable of making drive-ability judgments accurately. Potential training and interface solutions will be discussed. |
||||
1-4 |
John Morris and Keith Jones; Texas Tech University |
Can distance estimation training help some tasks and hurt others? | ||
|
People perform poorly when estimating distances (Gibson, 1947; Gibson & Bergman, 1954; Rogers, Sprol, Vitereles, Voss, & Wickens, 1945; Viteles, Gorsuch, Bayroff, Rogers, & Wickens, 1945). Devices such as night vision goggles are known to exacerbate this problem (Niall, Reising, & Martin, 1999; Reising & Martin, 1994, 1995), which has been cited as a possible contributor to helicopter accidents (Fuson, 1990). To combat this, researchers have begun to examine whether training might improve distance estimation. One training method under investigation involves the use of metric feedback during distance estimation. In our previous research (Jones, DeLucia, Hall, & Johnson, under review), we found that distance estimation training with metric feedback 1) improved performance when participants threw a beanbag to specified distances (e.g., 20 feet), and 2) degraded performance when participants threw a beanbag to targets. However, those findings came from studies that empl oyed quite different procedures. Thus, it was possible that such procedural differences might have contributed to these divergent outcomes. To test that possibility, 64 participants (32 male) threw a beanbag either to specified distances or targets under nearly identical throwing procedures. During training, all participants verbally estimated distances and half received metric feedback. The study replicated that training can benefit the throwing of a beanbag to a distance. Specifically, throwing accuracy improved following training with metric feedback, as compared to throwing performance prior to training. The study did not replicate, however, that training can degrade the throwing accuracy of a beanbag to a target. A possible reason for the lack of replication is discussed.
|
||||
1:00 - 2:00pm Session II
2-1 |
Harry Litaker, Shelby Thompson; Lockheed Martin, and Robert Howard; JSC NASA |
Lunar electric rover (LER) 3-day desert trial: A human factors assessment |
||
| The National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA) Lunar Electric Rover (LER) is a vehicle that provides capability for crew to perform planetary exploration in a comfortable, shirtsleeve environment. Crew can perform gross planetary surface translations and geological observations from within the vehicle, while still maintaining the ability to rapidly deploy a suited crew member on the surface to take full advantage of human perception, judgment, and dexterity. An assessment of the LER was completed to evaluate the human factors and crew accommodations of the LER and suit ports on a three day geological traverse in the desert. Areas of interest included: vehicle driving performance, vehicle display and control interface performance, crew visibility, vehicle seating, ExtraVehicular Activity (EVA) factors, and habitability. Results indicate the LER met all necessary objectives in terms of human performance and crew accommodations. However, several areas were noted as needing improvement, including: displays and controls, situational awareness while driving, and stowage. |
||||
2-2 |
Barry Tillman, NASA/ Lockheed Martin |
Human factors standards at NASA |
||
After nearly 30 years NASA is preparing a major revision to their human factors standard, NASA-STD-3000. NASA-STD-3000 is dated, does not apply to all systems (the original focus of the document was the Space Station), and is a confusing mix of standards and design recommendations. The new document, NASA-STD-3001, will be in a different format and a different application. NASA-STD-3001 will contain global standards that apply to all space systems. An accompanying handbook will provide more details of the science behind the standards, the application of the standards to specific programs, lessons learned, and further research that needs to be done. System developers will use the two documents (NASA-STD-3001 and the handbook) to write design requirement specific to a new system being developed. This presentation will discuss the reasons for this new format, the process used to write the standard and handbook, and the anticipated release dates. |
||||
2-3 |
Carroll Thronesberry, Arthur Molin; S&K Aerospace, and Debra Schreckenghost; TRACLabs |
Assisting concept of operations development with a storyboard orientation |
||
|
A Concept of Operations Storyboard Tool was developed to assist authors in building a concept of operations for a new system, refining it with stakeholders, and using it to support subsequent development activities. The Storyboard Tool integrates sketches with descriptions in a storyboard fashion. It also organizes concept of operation information into categories to remind authors of the key descriptive information and to enable automated information extraction by the tool to support subsequent development activities. In addition, the tool makes clear how it can be used flexibly to support a variety of project goals: an operations synopsis, a simple scenario sketch, a complete concept of operations document, evaluation for refinement and consensus, or a handoff to subsequent development activities. The user can tackle these objectives independently, incrementally, or in simultaneous combination. This workflow assistance differs from most wizards by revealing, r ather than hiding, the underlying structure and functioning of the tool. As a result, use of the workflow assistance familiarizes the user with available tool functions and data structures useful beyond the immediate application. We illustrate some of these use cases to show this product-oriented workflow assistance as well as some of the more basic storyboard support. The Storyboard Tool was developed iteratively, testing successive prototypes by using the tool to support ongoing research and development projects at NASA Johnson Space Center. In addition to describing and illustrating the tool, we present lessons learned about integrating sketches and descriptions for clearer communication, the benefits of organizing descriptive information as structured data, and assisting the process of concept development. We also discuss supporting the role of human factors in systems engineering and the value of iterative development for systems with innovative human task support |
||||
2-4
|
Shelby Thompson, Harry Litaker; Lockheed Martin, and Robert Howard; JSC NASA |
Evaluation of the habitable volume of the Altair lunar lander |
||
| For the 21st century, NASA is planning to operate lunar missions that will be more ambitious than those of the Apollo era. Missions are planned with crews of four, living and working in lunar habitats for more than a week. Habitability considerations will be essential for these longer duration missions, particularly in terms of habitable volume. The objective of the current evaluation was to obtain human factors data on the habitable volume of the Altair Lunar Lander, focusing on the key metrics of functional diameter and height of the Altair. An Altair mockup was used to test three different diameters and heights for both the ascent module and airlock, using both suited and unsuited participants. Results found that a 2.30 meter height of the ascent module, and a 2.00 meter height in the airlock dome was acceptable. For the ascent module, the 2.85 meter diameter was preferred to carry out needed activities, with a smaller 2.00 meter diameter being acceptable for the airlock. Additional habitable volume studies are planned.
|
||||
2:15 - 3:15pm - Session III: Human Factors Potpourri
3-1
|
Sherry Thaxton; Texas Tech University, and Jeff Wolstad; University of Nebraska-Lincoln |
Development and evaluation of thoracic spine modeling techniques |
||
|
The major objective of this study was to examine formulations of optimization-based models of the thoracic spine, comparing model predictions to EMG data collected during lifting tasks. The models employed here were developed based on traditional lumbar spine modeling techniques, but were expanded to include a representation of the rib cage and to predict forces at multiple vertebral levels. Optical motion tracking data were used in conjunction with known forces at the hands to calculate reaction moments at vertebrae T8 through T12. These moments were used to generate muscle force predictions using linear and nonlinear models, with and without rib cage representation included, and with and without limitations preventing muscle forces from varying too widely between adjacent vertebral levels. Tasks performed for data collection consisted of symmetric and asymmetric lifts of low and high force loads. Model predictions were compared to EMG data in order to examine mode l and test parameters. Though none of the model formulations provided good agreement between model predictions and EMG data, differences in model predictions allowed for comparisons in order to select parameters producing the best results. During this research, the simplest model formulations actually provided the best results. The linear objective function performed better, as did model formulations not including rib cage representation and model formulations not including limitations between vertebral levels. Testing parameters impacted model agreement with EMG as well, with models performing better for male subjects. Better model performance was also found for symmetric lifts and lifts of lower force loads.
|
||||
3-2
|
Walter Protheroe Jr.; E-MAC Inc, J. Hovis; University of Waterloo; and R. Rideout; Colorado School of Mines |
Visual color - a teaching tool |
||
|
Traditionally science courses from the 8th grade to lower level college have taught a simplistic description of how the eye receives color and sends that information to the brain. We say that the cones in the eye receive differing amounts of red, green and blue colors and the brain interprets that signal. |
||||
3-3
|
Timothy Ballew, 8-bit Bear Consulting |
Design of educational games |
||
|
Historically, educational games (under the guise of Edutainment ) have left a lot to be desired. In the best cases, these types of games provide a somewhat engaging and interactive space in which to practice math or learn aspects of science or geography. Alternatively, edutainment games are the worst form of shovelware , mass produced and thrown to consumers under the guise of an entertaining system for learning, destined to end up in the bargain bin. These types of edutainment games usually fail to integrate learning into the game and provide little to no intrinsic motivation. It is clear that a different approach is needed if educational games are going to evolve into something more useful. Four main factors influence the acceptance and eventual learning facilitated by educational games; challenge, curiosity, and fantasy (Malone, 1981) and time for reflection (Paras and Bizzocchi, 2005). Each of these factors plays an important role in the design, utility and eventual use of educational games, and combining these four design elements help to make a game that is both engaging and educational. Utilizing the level and game editors included in many retail games, consumers have the means to create educational games to be shared with the public. One game that lends itself fully to this type of educational game creation is Little Big Planet (LBP), a side scrolling adventure game for the PlayStation 3. |
||||
3-4
|
Sam Ranasinghe, Atkins |
Human factors integration into the facility design process |
||
|
In major design projects the integration of Human Factors is often overlooked or integrated too late into the design process. This may mean it is too costly and disruptive to make any tangible changes to the design. By careful planning and execution of a Human Factors Integration Plan (HFIP) at the relevant phases of the Facility Design Process, the safety, quality and long-term cost benefits associated with HF can be maximized with minimal impact on engineering and construction costs and schedule. The aim of this presentation is to discuss effective integration of Human Factors into a five phase oil and gas facility design process. The five phase design process is typical of major oil and gas projects. A real case study of an offshore platform design will be used to demonstrate examples of successful HF integration. The client involved uses a Project Development and Execution Process which consists of the five phases: 1. Identify and assess opportunities The majority of the HF activity took place during Phases 4 (although there was also opportunity for input during Phases 3 and 5). It was highly desirable that these HF activities were not so much run alongside engineering, but were an integrated part of it. Lessons learnt from this case study will be presented and discussed with recommendations for considering HF in future design projects. |
||||
3:15 - 4:30pm - Posters
P1
|
Jennifer Boyer, Aniko Sandor, and Kritina Holden; Lockheed Martin |
Dual task performance under unimanual and bimanual control |
|
This study was designed to assess performance in a multi-task paradigm using unimanual control and bimanual control of tasks that may be encountered in space flight. Twelve subjects complete a procedural task, display unit switching task, and a tracking task in isolation (baseline) and in combination. In the unimanual condition, the tasks were performed using the same joystick device with a castle switch on the top of the device. In the bimanual condition, the tasks were performed using two joysticks, one in each hand. We found that coordinating motor movements across the hands only results in a decrement in accuracy of operations, not in task completion times. We also found that requiring right-handed subjects to perform more than one task with the left hand while performing a concurrent task with the right hand results in poorer performance and higher levels of perceived difficulty than only performing one task with the left hand, or all tasks with the right hand. This data has implications for spaceflight as well as other domains that require motoric multi-task operations |
|||
P2
|
Daniel Carr; NASA/ Lockheed Martin, and Richard Ellenberger; NASA |
Using life-cycle human factors engineering to avoid 2.4 million in costs: Lessons learned from NASA's Requirements Verification Process for space payloads |
|
|
|
|||
P3
|
Katherine Griggs, Sandra Bogus, and David Westmoreland; University of Houston - Clear Lake |
Alarms: Discrete sounds vs. sonifications |
|
| When people think of methods of presenting data, they tend to think first of visual displays. However, research has shown that in many circumstances, auditory displays are at least as effective as visual displays at communicating data. One example might be an alarm that sounds when the pressurization in a space vehicle reaches a dangerous threshold. While a visual alarm may be useful, an auditory alarm is more apt to catch users attention due to the omnidirectional nature of the sense of hearing. Another way to monitor pressurization could be through sonification, which is the use of non-speech audio to monitor data. Using this method, a user could remain cognizant of pressure levels while attending to another task. The purpose of this study is to explore whether an alarm, a sonification, or the combination of the two will enable a user respond most effectively to a dangerous scenario.
|
|||
P4
|
Andrew Muddimer, Sam L. McLellan, and Dana Harris; Schlumberger |
Self Testing Evolutionary Persona (STEP) protocol |
|
Personas are becoming a more prevalent method for connecting users with development teams. It is therefore important to ensure that information included in personas portrays the reality exemplified by users. We created a self-validating technique which encompasses users completing a rating scale to provide a perceived rating on the completion and relatedness of the persona. Of the six personas reviewed, two were considered valid after the first round of validations. The remaining four personas were revised based on comments provided on the rating scale, and put through the validation process again. We found the rating scales and comments to be beneficial in ensuring that the correct information is incorporated in the persona, and that the persona is a true representation of the user. |
|||
P5
|
P. Kevin Hayes, Jo Jardina, and Gianna Aldrigdge; University of Houston - Clear Lake |
Eyeblink as a measure of workload for auditory displays |
|
| Mental workload measurement is often used as a tool for determining the cognitive demands of increasingly complex systems encountered by today's users. Workload measurements typically employ subjective measures such as the National Aeronautics and Space Administration Task Load Index (NASA TLX). Objective physiological measures such as eyeblink, however, are often found in studies involving visual stimuli. In the body of work examining auditory displays subjective workload measures, particularly the NASA TLX, dominate. We believe that the investigation of eyeblink as physiological measure of mental workload may provide an additional measure of the construct with regard to auditory displays. In the current study, participants will experience three auditory displays with increasingly complex cognitive demands: a series of simple tones, an auditory progress bar, and an auditory box plot, while eyeblink frequency and amplitude are measured. Participants will also complete the NASA TLX for each task. We expect to find that as the complexity of the task increases, the eyeblink frequency will decrease (an indication of more cognitive workload) and NASA-TLX ratings will increase. |
|||
P6
|
Andy Su and Philip Kortum; Rice University |
Ethnographic study of on-hold caller multitasking behavior |
|
|
|
|||
