Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From -To) SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)AFRL; AFRL/HEA SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S) Air Force Research Laboratory Human Effectiveness Directorate Warfighter Readiness Research Division 6030 South Kent Street Mesa AZ 85212-6061 AFRL-HE-AZ-TP-2007-03 DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENTApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTESThis paper was originally published in the journal Human Factors (Volume 48, Fall 2006). ABSTRACTObjective: We provide a review and analysis of much of the published literature on visual perception issues that impact the design and use of head-mounted displays (HMDs). Background: Unlike the previous literature on HMDs, this review draws heavily from the basic vision literature in order to help provide insight for future design solutions for HMDs. Method: Included in this review are articles and books found cited in other works as well as articles and books obtained from an Internet search. Results: Issues discussed include the effect of brightness and contrast on depth of field, dark focus, dark vergence, and perceptual constancy; the effect of accommodation/vergence synergy on perceptual constancy, eyestrain, and discomfort; the relationship of field of view to the functioning of different visual pathways and the types of visualmotor tasks mediated by them; the relationship of binocular input to visual suppression; and the importance of head movements, head tracking, and display update lag. Conclusion: This paper offers a set of recommendations for the design and use of HMDs. Application: Consideration of the basic vision literature will provide insight for future design solutions for HMDs.

Tests of 3D motion perception are the best predictor of EB, while DVA velocity susceptibility is the best predictor of hazard perception. Motion perception training appears to result in faster braking responses.

Objective: We provide a review and analysis of much of the published literature on binocular rivalry that is relevant to the design and use of head-worn displays (HWDs). Background: This review draws heavily from both the basic vision literature and applied HWD literature in order to help provide insight for minimizing the effects of binocular rivalry when HWDs are worn. Method: Included in this review are articles and books found cited in other works as well as articles and books obtained from an Internet search. Results: Issues discussed and summarized are (a) characteristics of binocular rivalry, (b) stimulus factors affecting rivalry, (c) cognitive variables affecting rivalry, and (d) tasks affected by rivalry. Conclusion: This paper offers a set of recommendations for minimizing the effects of binocular rivalry when HWDs are used as well as recommendations for future research. Application: Considerations of the basic vision literature on binocular rivalry will provide insight for future design solutions for HWDs.

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number. PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS. REPORT DATE (DD-MM SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)AFRL; AFRL/HEA SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT NUMBER(S)Air DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENTApproved for public release; distribution is unlimited. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTESThis paper was originally published in the 2006 Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society conference. ABSTRACTAs monocular head-mounted displays (HMDs) are introduced into existing flight simulators for training and mission rehearsal it will be important to determine whether binocular rivalry affects the visibility of HMD presented symbology or the out-the-window (OTW) flight simulator display imagery. In the present study, we examined whether rivalry suppression could be objectively measured under conditions that simulated a monocular HMD and OTW display, and whether voluntary attention and moving imagery influenced the strength of rivalry suppression. The results indicated that strength of suppression under these conditions was less than that found under classic dichoptic viewing conditions, and that attention had little influence on performance. SUBJECT TERMSHead-mounted displays, HMD, binocular rivalry, flight simulation ABSTRACTAs monocular head-mounted displays (HMDs) are introduced into existing flight simulators for training and mission rehearsal it will be important to determine whether binocular rivalry affects the visibility of HMD presented symbology or the out-the-window (OTW) flight simulator display imagery. In the present study, we examined whether rivalry suppression could be objectively measured under conditions that simulated a monocular HMD and OTW display, and whether voluntary attention and moving imagery influenced the strength of rivalry suppression. The results indicated that strength of suppression under these conditions was less than that found under classic dichoptic viewing conditions, and that attention had little influence on performance.