Synchronous and asynchronous presentations of auditory and visual signals: Implications for control console design.

In this study, the effects of synchronous and asynchronous auditory and visual signal presentation on reaction times and response errors were examined to provide data for developing ergonomics recommendations for control console design. The results showed that synchronous presentation for combined visual and auditory stimulation facilitated responses, and shorter reaction times and higher response accuracies were obtained. When visual and auditory stimuli were presented synchronously but in opposing (left and right) positions, a visual dominance phenomenon was found, such that the subjects responded more often (81%) with faster responses to the visual signal. This visual dominance effect occurred even in the asynchronous condition when the auditory stimulus was presented 200 ms earlier than the visual one. It was also found that response speed and accuracy improved with increasing length of the warning time interval, and when an uncrossed hand posture was used for making responses. The above results were translated into practical ergonomic recommendations for response key layout, warning time interval, and ways of presenting visual and auditory signals to improve control console design.

[1]  Gavriel Salvendy,et al.  Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics , 2005 .

[2]  Mark S. Sanders,et al.  Human Factors in Engineering and Design , 1957 .

[3]  Przemysław Oborski,et al.  Man-machine interactions in advanced manufacturing systems , 2004 .

[4]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Multiple resources and performance prediction , 2002 .

[5]  M. Posner,et al.  Visual dominance: an information-processing account of its origins and significance. , 1976, Psychological review.

[6]  Wesley E. Woodson,et al.  Human Factors Design Handbook , 1981 .

[7]  Adelbert W. Bronkhorst,et al.  Application of a Three-Dimensional Auditory Display in a Flight Task , 1996, Hum. Factors.

[8]  Karl H.E. Kroemer,et al.  Ergonomics: How to Design for Ease and Efficiency , 1993 .

[9]  Y. Coello,et al.  Pointing movement visually controlled through a video display: adaptation to scale change , 2000, Ergonomics.

[10]  Suebsak Nanthavanij,et al.  Predicting the optimum number, location, and signal sound level of auditory warning devices for manufacturing facilities , 1999 .

[11]  Andries F. Sanders,et al.  Elements of Human Performance: Reaction Processes and Attention in Human Skill , 1998 .

[12]  David D. Woods,et al.  Systems with Human Monitors: A Signal Detection Analysis , 1985, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[13]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Effects of Data-Link Modality and Display Redundancy on Pilot Performance: An Attentional Perspective , 2003 .

[14]  William Mendenhall,et al.  Introduction to Probability and Statistics , 1961, The Mathematical Gazette.

[15]  Roland Kadefors,et al.  Ergonomic evaluation of complex work: a participative approach employing video–computer interaction, exemplified in a study of order picking , 2000 .

[16]  Robert A. North.  Task Functional Demands as Factors in Dual-Task Performance , 1977 .

[17]  J Etherton,et al.  A robot safety experiment varying robot speed and contrast with human decision cost. , 1990, Applied ergonomics.

[18]  C. K. Peck,et al.  Spatial disparity affects visual-auditory interactions in human sensorimotor processing , 1998, Experimental Brain Research.

[19]  Neville Stanton.  Human factors of alarm design , 1994 .

[20]  E. Knudsen,et al.  Creating a unified representation of visual and auditory space in the brain. , 1995, Annual review of neuroscience.

[21]  Kyu Sik Kwon.  Optimum Design for Emergency Stop Button on Robot Teach Pendants. , 1996 .

[22]  Roberto Nicoletti,et al.  Spatial stimulus-response compatibility. , 1990 .

[23]  Kim J. Vicente,et al.  Designing Functional Visualizations for Aircraft Systems Status Displays , 1999 .

[24]  R. C. Oldfield.  The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory. , 1971, Neuropsychologia.

[25]  J. G. Hollands,et al.  Engineering Psychology and Human Performance , 1984 .

[26]  Robert W. Proctor,et al.  Stimulus-Response Compatibility: An Integrated Perspective , 1990 .

[27]  H Kantowitz,et al.  Testing tapping timesharing, II: Auditory secondary task. , 1976, Acta psychologica.

[28]  Edward Marshall,et al.  Alarms in nuclear power plant control rooms: current approaches and future design , 1995 .

[29]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  When is Less More? Attention and Workload in Auditory, Visual, and Redundant Patient-Monitoring Conditions , 2001 .

[30]  F. Colavita,et al.  A further investigation of visual dominance , 1979, Perception & psychophysics.

[31]  Michael A. Goodrich,et al.  Human-Robot Interaction: A Survey , 2008, Found. Trends Hum. Comput. Interact..

[32]  M. Frens,et al.  Spatial and temporal factors determine auditory-visual interactions in human saccadic eye movements , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.