A Comparison of Soldier Performance Using Current Land Navigation Equipment With Information Integrated on a Helmet-Mounted Display

Glumm, Monica M.; Marshak, William P.; Branscome, Teresa A.; McWesler, Mary; Patton, Debra J.

doi:10.1037/e444032005-001

Cited by 16 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Monocular HMDs have been used in a variety of applications, including aviation, 5 displays for dismounted infantry, 6 and personal entertainment. 7 Often, significant issues with their use have been reported and attributed to a phenomenon called binocular rivalry.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visibility of monocular symbology in transparent head-mounted display applications

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

With increased reliance on head-mounted displays (HMDs), such as the Joint Helmet Mounted Cueing System and F-35 Helmet Mounted Display System, research concerning visual performance has also increased in importance. Although monocular HMDs have been used successfully for many years, a number of authors have reported significant problems with their use. Certain problems have been attributed to binocular rivalry when differing imagery is presented to the two eyes.With binocular rivalry, the visibility of the images in the two eyes fluctuates, with one eye's view becoming dominant, and thus visible, while the other eye's view is suppressed, which alternates over time. Rivalry is almost certainly created when viewing an occluding monocular HMD. For semi-transparent monocular HMDs, however, much of the scene is binocularly fused, with additional imagery superimposed in one eye. Binocular fusion is thought to prevent rivalry.The present study was designed to investigate differences in visibility between monocularly and binocularly presented symbology at varying levels of contrast and while viewing simulated flight over terrain at various speeds. Visibility was estimated by measuring the presentation time required to identify a test probe (tumbling E) embedded within other static symbology. Results indicated that there were large individual differences, but that performance decreased with decreased test probe contrast under monocular viewing relative to binocular viewing conditions. Rivalry suppression may reduce visibility of semi-transparent monocular HMD imagery. However, factors, such as contrast sensitivity, masking, and conditions such as monofixation, will be important to examine in future research concerning visibility of HMD imagery.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Visibility of monocular symbology in transparent head-mounted display applications

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…audio, visual, or haptic). One study 9 has been conducted that examined the effects of FOR and POV on displays used for land navigation. The study was conducted for the United States Army to research the integration of navigational information through an HMD compared to using in-service navigational equipment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of frame of reference and point of view on infantry wayfinding

Kumagai¹,

Allard

2003

SPIE Proceedings

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two frames of reference (exocentric and egocentric) and two points of view (first-person and second-person) were contrasted in two experiments to measure their effect on wayfinding performance. Twelve male infantry soldiers used three helmet-mounted display designs (second-person exocentric, second-person egocentric, first-person egocentric) to locate bearings to waypoints. From a constant location, participants were required to face waypoints presented at offset bearings of 25°, 65° and 125°. The egocentric display supported faster performance times than the exocentric display, significantly faster at the largest offset. Faster times were attributed to fewer head misdirection errors and better display compatibility with expectations of spatial orientation. The second-person display supported significantly faster performance times than the first-person display at all offset levels. However, the time differences were not attributed to accuracy or head misdirection errors. Other display features, such as amount of information or field of view may have contributed to the differences. There were no qualitative differences between displays for ease of use, acceptance for land navigation, or mental demand. Implications for the design of helmet-mounted displays for land-based navigational tasks are discussed.

show abstract

“…The data used to develop the cognitive model reported here were collected by members of the Human Research and Engineering Directorate of the U.S. Army Research Laboratory (ARL) as part of a study by Glumm et al (1998). In that study, 12 male infantry soldiers were required to perform a series of navigational tasks while wearing a helmet-mounted display (HMD) or while using the current navigational equipment (i.e., a map and compass).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Developing an ACT-R model of mental manipulation

Kelley¹,

Lee²,

Wiley³

2000

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to better understand the use of cognitive architectures within the Human Research and Engineering Directorate of the U.S. Army Research Laboratory, and with the intent of supporting the Land Warrior program, members of the Manned Systems Design Methods Team of the Integration Methods Branch developed an adaptive control of thought-rational (ACT-R) (Anderson & Lebiere, 1998) model of mental manipulation. The goal of the model was to reproduce errors made during mental manipulation, which were similar in type and number to those made by actual soldiers who took a paper-and-pencil test of mental manipulation as part of a cognitive assessment battery. The final model was able to replicate errors made by the soldiers in the mental manipulation test; however, further work and data collection are needed to make the model predictive of the types of errors soldiers could make if they were exposed to specific types of mental manipulation problems. Lessons learned from this initial application of ACT-R are also discussed.

show abstract

A Comparison of Soldier Performance Using Current Land Navigation Equipment With Information Integrated on a Helmet-Mounted Display

Cited by 16 publications

References 8 publications

Visibility of monocular symbology in transparent head-mounted display applications

Visibility of monocular symbology in transparent head-mounted display applications

Effects of frame of reference and point of view on infantry wayfinding

Developing an ACT-R model of mental manipulation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About