Updating the Direction Orientation Task: An Aviation Selection Tool

Abstract

Military branches rely on selection and placement testing to help identify individuals who will be well-suited for jobs that they likely have little exposure to or experience with. The goal for this research was to update the Direction Orientation Task (DOT), which is used by both the United States Navy and Air Force as part of their aviation selection batteries. The current version of DOT has limitations such as ceiling effects in some populations and a restriction of range within test scores. We created a new version (DOT2) that attempted to increase the difficulty and variance of the test (among other things discussed in the paper). Ninety-five student Naval Aviators completed an experiment where they completed DOT1, DOT2, and the operation span. Results showed that DOT2 was significantly more difficult and had increased variance compared to DOT1. Scores on DOT1 were highly related to scores on DOT2, both were similarly unrelated to scores the operation span, and both were similarly related to the number of math errors made on the operation span. These preliminary data suggest that DOT2 may be a viable upgrade to DOT1.

Spatial Ability Stress Test for Screening and Selection: The Development of SCOUT-R

“…First, there are observed practice effects when the DOT is administered on back-to-back days (Momen, 2009). Second, there are a limited number of trials and a ceiling effect found within the aviator community (Keiser, et al, 2019). Last, recent assessments have shown that the DOT and updated versions of the DOT may not assess SpA as the task was intended (Coyne, et al, 2020).…”

Does a New Version of the Direction Orientation Task Measure Spatial Ability?

“…The DOT 2 task was created as a potential alternative to address some of these short comings of the DOT (Keiser et al, 2019). Specifically, the DOT 2 has 144 possible trials, and reduces the chances of correctly guessing.…”

“…Understand an object's spatial orientating from an aerial view is clearly an important ability for pilots and the test certainly has face validity. However, there are limitations to this task, including a limited number of potential trials and a ceiling effect (Keiser et al, 2019). There is also evidence of a practice effect on the DOT, as accuracy and response time both improve on the task after exposure on consecutive days (Momen, 2009).…”

“…Hegarty points out that a drawback to this approach is that developing a measure of spatial ability measure is not systematic or theoretically motivated. Spatial ability tests such as the DOT can predict success in military aviation (Keiser et al, 2019;Barron & Rose, 2014), however, there is evidence to suggest that individuals using a math strategy outperform individuals using a spatial strategy (Coyne et al, Submitted). The use of non-spatial strategies on measures of spatial ability is not uncommon (Hegarty & Waller, 2005).…”

“…The DOT 2.5 was developed in response to problems with the previous DOT replacement candidate the DOT 2 (Coyne et al, 2020, Keiser et al, 2019. Specifically, individuals who completed the DOT 2 task were two times more likely to use a math strategy than a spatial strategy when performing the task.…”