Effects of Touch, Voice, and Multimodal Input, and Task Load on Multiple-UAV Monitoring Performance During Simulated Manned-Unmanned Teaming in a Military Helicopter

2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (8) ◽  
pp. 1117-1129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel J. Levulis ◽  
Patricia R. DeLucia ◽  
So Young Kim
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Ability ◽  
Situation Awareness ◽  
Supervisory Control ◽  
Aerial Photographs ◽  
Visual Displays ◽  
Radio Communications ◽  
Landing Zone ◽  
Task Load ◽  
Voice Control ◽  
And Task

Objective: We evaluated three interface input methods for a simulated manned-unmanned teaming (MUM-T) supervisory control system designed for Air Mission Commanders (AMCs) in Black Hawk helicopters. Background: A key component of the U.S. Army’s vision for unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) is to integrate UAVs into manned missions, called MUM-T (Department of Defense, 2010). One application of MUM-T is to provide the AMC of a team of Black Hawk helicopters control of multiple UAVs, offering advanced reconnaissance and real-time intelligence of flight routes and landing zones. Method: Participants supervised a (simulated) team of two helicopters and three UAVs while traveling toward a landing zone to deploy ground troops. Participants classified aerial photographs collected by UAVs, monitored instrument warnings, and responded to radio communications. We manipulated interface input modality (touch, voice, multimodal) and task load (number of photographs). Results: Compared with voice, touch and multimodal control resulted in better performance on all tasks and resulted in lower subjective workload and greater subjective situation awareness, ps < .05. Participants with higher spatial ability classified more aerial photographs ( r = .75) and exhibited shorter response times to instrument warnings ( r = −.58) than participants with lower spatial ability. Conclusion: Touchscreen and multimodal control were superior to voice control in a supervisory control task that involved monitoring visual displays and communicating on radio channels. Application: Although voice control is often considered a more natural and less physically demanding input method, caution is needed when designing visual displays for users sharing common communication channels.

Effects of Touch, Voice, and Multimodal Input on Multiple-UAV Monitoring During Simulated Manned-Unmanned Teaming in a Military Helicopter

2016 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 132-132 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel J. Levulis ◽  
So Young Kim ◽  
Patricia R. DeLucia
Keyword(s):  
Situation Awareness ◽  
Unmanned Vehicles ◽  
Simulation Software ◽  
Aerial Photographs ◽  
Design Decision ◽  
Radio Communications ◽  
Voice Input ◽  
Input Modality ◽  
Landing Zone ◽  
Communication Task

A key component of the U.S. Army’s vision for future unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) operations is to integrate UAVs into manned missions, an effort called manned-unmanned teaming (MUM-T; Department of Defense, 2010). One candidate application of MUM-T is to provide the Air Mission Commander (AMC) of a team of Black Hawk helicopters control of multiple UAVs, offering advanced reconnaissance and real-time intelligence of the upcoming flight route and landing zones. One important design decision in the development of a system to support multi-UAV control by an AMC is the selection of the interface used to control the system, for example, through a touchscreen or voice commands. A variety of input methods is feasible from an engineering standpoint, but little is known about the effect of the input interface on AMC performance. The current study evaluated three interface input methods for a MUM-T supervisory control system used by an AMC located in a Black Hawk helicopter. The evaluation was conducted with simulation software developed by General Electric. Eighteen participants supervised a team of two helicopters and three UAVs as they traveled towards a landing zone to deploy ground troops. A primary monitor, located in front of the participant, presented displays used to monitor flight instruments and to supervise the manned and unmanned vehicles that were under the AMC’s control. A secondary monitor, located adjacent to the participant, presented displays used to inspect and classify aerial photographs taken by the UAVs. Participants were responsible for monitoring and responding to instrument warnings, classifying the aerial photographs as either neutral or hostile, and responding to radio communications. We manipulated interface input modality (touch, voice, multimodal) and workload (rate of photographs to classify). Participants completed three blocks of 8.5-minute experimental trials, one for each input modality. Results indicated that touch and multimodal input methods were superior to voice input. Participants were more efficient with touch and multimodal control (compared to voice), evidenced by relatively shorter photograph classification times, a greater percentage of classified photographs, and shorter instrument warning response times. Touch and multimodal input also resulted in a greater percentage of correct responses to communication task queries, lower subjective workload, greater subjective situation awareness, and higher usability ratings. Multimodal input did not result in significant performance advantages compared to touch alone. Designers should carefully consider the performance tradeoffs when selecting from candidate input methods during system development.

Enhancing Perceived Situation Awareness and Reducing Perceived Workload with a Likelihood Alarm Display

2005 ◽  
Vol 49 (17) ◽  
pp. 1677-1681 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corey K. Fallon ◽  
Ernesto A. Bustamante ◽  
James P. Bliss
Keyword(s):  
Situation Awareness ◽  
Psychology Students ◽  
Primary Task ◽  
Order Effects ◽  
Task Load ◽  
Positive Effects ◽  
Perceived Workload ◽  
Display Order ◽  
And Task

The researchers investigated the effects of a likelihood alarm display (LAD) on perceptions of workload and situation awareness (SA) during varying degrees of taskload. Twenty-four psychology students reacted to alarms while performing a complex primary task. The researchers examined participants performances during four experimental sessions. Two conditions of alarm display (binary and likelihood) and task load (low and high) were manipulated within groups. In addition, alarm display order (binary first or likelihood first) and task load order (low first or high first) were examined between groups. Results showed greater SA and reduced workload when participants used a likelihood alarm display and when they experienced low task load. Significant order effects also occurred. This study demonstrated the positive effects of a likelihood alarm display on perceptions of workload and SA, and suggests that LAD use may reduce workload and enhance SA.

Situation Awareness Reacquisition in a Supervisory Control Task

2011 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Gartenberg ◽  
Malcolm McCurry ◽  
Greg Trafton
Keyword(s):  
Situation Awareness ◽  
Supervisory Control ◽  
Control Task

Emotional impact, task performance and task load of green walls exposure in a virtual environment

Indoor Air ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seungkeun Yeom ◽  
Hakpyeong Kim ◽  
Taehoon Hong ◽  
Changyoon Ji ◽  
Dong‐Eun Lee
Keyword(s):  
Task Performance ◽  
Virtual Environment ◽  
Emotional Impact ◽  
Task Load ◽  
Green Walls ◽  
And Task

Usability and Task Load of Applications in Augmented and Virtual Reality

2021 ◽  
pp. 708-718
Author(s):  
Helena Lovasz-Bukvova ◽  
Marvin Hölzl ◽  
Gerhard Kormann-Hainzl ◽  
Thomas Moser ◽  
Tanja Zigart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Reality ◽  
Task Load ◽  
And Task

Subjective Measurement Assessment in a Full Mission Scout-Attack Helicopter Simulation

1998 ◽  
Vol 42 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-30 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan T. Heers ◽  
Patricia A. Casper
Keyword(s):  
Situation Awareness ◽  
Inverse Relationship ◽  
Advanced Technology ◽  
Stepwise Multiple Regression ◽  
Task Load ◽  
Advanced Technologies ◽  
Additional Equipment ◽  
The Us ◽  
Perceived Workload ◽  
Nasa Task Load Index

A full mission helicopter simulation was conducted in support of the US Army's Rotorcraft Pilot's Associate Advanced Technology Demonstration. Four crews flew four doctrinally correct scenarios under two mission equipment package conditions. The Advanced Mission Equipment Package (AMEP) contained additional equipment and longer sensor ranges than the Baseline Mission Equipment Package (BMEP). Following each run, pilots filled out the NASA Task Load Index (TLX) workload scales and a perceived situation awareness (SA) scale. TLX ratings were lower for the AMEP, while SA ratings were higher for the AMEP. A similar inverse relationship was found in the scenario effects. A stepwise multiple regression found a significant relationship between SA ratings and three of the component TLX subscale ratings. Both perceived workload and situation awareness ratings indicate a benefit from the advanced technologies available on the AMEP. These measures were also sensitive to the varying demands of the scenarios and pilot responsibilities.

The influence of task load on situation awareness and control strategy in the ATC tower environment

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maik Friedrich ◽  
Maresa Biermann ◽  
Patrick Gontar ◽  
Marcus Biella ◽  
Klaus Bengler
Keyword(s):  
Situation Awareness ◽  
Control Strategy ◽  
Task Load ◽  
Atc Tower ◽  
And Control
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document