Evaluation of wearable simulation interface for military training.

OBJECTIVE: This research evaluated the training effectiveness of a novel simulation interface, a wearable computer integrated into a soldier's load-bearing equipment. BACKGROUND: Military teams often use game-based simulators on desktop computers to train squad-level procedures. A wearable computer interface that mimics the soldier's equipment was expected to provide better training through increased realism and immersion. METHOD: A heuristic usability evaluation and two experiments were conducted. Eight evaluators interacted with both wearable and desktop interfaces and completed a usability survey. The first experiment compared the training retention of the wearable interface with a desktop simulator and interactive training video. The second experiment compared the training transfer of the wearable and desktop simulators with a live training environment. RESULTS: Results indicated the wearable interface was more difficult to use and elicited stronger symptoms of simulator sickness. There was no significant difference in training retention between the wearable, desktop, or interactive video training methods. The live training used in the second experiment provided superior training transfer than the simulator conditions, with no difference between the desktop and wearable. CONCLUSION: The wearable simulator interface did not provide better training than the desktop computer interface. It also had poorer usability and caused worse simulator sickness. Therefore, it was a less effective training tool. APPLICATION: This research illustrates the importance of conducting empirical evaluations of novel training technologies. New and innovative technologies are always coveted by users, but new does not always guarantee improvement.

Individual differences in response to automation: the five factor model of personality.

This study examined the relationship of operator personality (Five Factor Model) and characteristics of the task and of adaptive automation (reliability and adaptiveness-whether the automation was well-matched to changes in task demand) to operator performance, workload, stress, and coping. This represents the first investigation of how the Five Factors relate to human response to automation. One-hundred-sixty-one college students experienced either 75% or 95% reliable automation provided with task loads of either two or four displays to be monitored. The task required threat detection in a simulated uninhabited ground vehicle (UGV) task. Task demand exerted the strongest influence on outcome variables. Automation characteristics did not directly impact workload or stress, but effects did emerge in the context of trait-task interactions that varied as a function of the dimension of workload and stress. The pattern of relationships of traits to dependent variables was generally moderated by at least one task factor. Neuroticism was related to poorer performance in some conditions, and all five traits were associated with at least one measure of workload and stress. Neuroticism generally predicted increased workload and stress and the other traits predicted decreased levels of these states. However, in the case of the relation of Extraversion and Agreeableness to Worry, Frustration, and avoidant coping, the direction of effects varied across task conditions. The results support incorporation of individual differences into automation design by identifying the relevant person characteristics and using the information to determine what functions to automate and the form and level of automation.