Training Effectiveness of Wearable and Desktop Simulator Interfaces

Abstract

The availability of increasingly advanced simulation interfaces has led researchers to question whether these newer interfaces provide a more effective means of providing simulation-based training. An empirical evaluation was conducted comparing the knowledge gained from training with three different systems: narrated computer animations (Flash videos) that are currently in use in the U.S. Army, an interactive virtual environment presented on a standard desktop PC, and the same virtual environment presented on a wearable simulator with head-mounted display. Results indicated no difference in the knowledge gained from any of the training methods, although the Flash videos were deemed less engaging, enjoyable, and elicited less presence than both of the virtual environment training methods. The wearable simulation interface was also found to cause greater levels of simulator sickness than either the desktop PC or Flash video training methods. The results of the current study show no evidence of a benefit of using the wearable system over more traditional desktop systems.

How Simulator Interfaces Affect Transfer of Training: Comparing Wearable and Desktop Systems

“…This experiment validates prior research (Taylor & Barnett, 2011) which found no training advantage from the use of a wearable simulator over a desktop computer when training basic field maneuvers. The current experiment tested the wearable and desktop interfaces for their ability to train more complex procedural skills and again found no appreciable difference between the wearable and desktop in their training capabilities.…”

“…However, the results of this experiment suggest that being able to perform these movements seems to have little influence on learning procedural skills. Results from the previous experiment (Taylor & Barnett, 2011) indicated that the features of the wearable interface also have little influence on learning cognitive skills, at least no more than the desktop interface or training videos. If the assumption that the improvement in mission completion time was due to the simulator groups learning psychomotor skills, then it is clear the wearable simulator's use of natural movements does not transfer to live performance.…”

“…This research is the second in a series of experiments investigating the training transfer of wearable and desktop simulators. The first experiment (Taylor & Barnett, 2011) measured participant's recall of procedures trained in wearable and desktop simulators. Following the experiment, questions arose as to whether cognitive recall of what is essentially procedural knowledge could be considered training transfer.…”

“…Therefore, an experiment was conducted which compared how well military tasks were trained using a wearable simulator interface and a common desktop computer interface, with the U.S. Army's Interactive Multimedia Instructional videos currently in use as a control (Taylor & Barnett, 2011). This experiment did not find any significant difference in the participant's ability to recall correct and incorrect steps for the military tasks, regardless of the training condition.…”

“…A discussion of previous research relevant to this series of experiments can be found in Taylor and Barnett (2011).…”