Using the Subjective Workload Dominance (SWORD) Technique for Projective Workload Assessment

The present study examined the utility of the Subjective Workload Dominance (SWORD) technique as a projective workload tool. Two groups predicted the workload associated with using six possible head-up display (HUD) formats. One group contained college students inexperienced with HUDs, and the second group contained operational F-16 pilots who commonly used HUD displays but were familiar with only one format. The projective ratings from these groups were correlated with retrospective ratings from a group of operational F-16 pilots that had experienced all six formats in a simulator study. The correlation between the projective and retrospective groups of pilots was highly positive, and both groups′ ratings correlated positively with the simulator study performance. In contrast, the student ratings were not significantly correlated with the ratings from either of the other groups, nor was performance. The results support the utility of the SWORD technique as a projective tool, provided a group of subject matter experts is available to make the required judgments.

[1]  Fred H. Previc,et al.  Effects of Variations in Head-Up Display Pitch-Ladder Representations on Orientation Recognition , 1989 .

[2]  James C. Byers,et al.  Operator Workload in the UH-60A Black Hawk: Crew Results vs. Tawl Model Predictions , 1989 .

[3]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Predictive Performance Models and Multiple Task Performance , 1989 .

[4]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[5]  John M. Reising,et al.  Advanced Head-Up Display (HUD) Symbology: Aiding Unusual Attitude Recovery , 1987 .

[6]  G. Crawford,et al.  The Analysis of Subjective Judgment Matrices. , 1985 .

[7]  Thomas E. Nygren,et al.  The Subjective Workload Assessment Technique: A Scaling Procedure for Measuring Mental Workload , 1988 .

[8]  D. Gopher,et al.  On the Psychophysics of Workload: Why Bother with Subjective Measures? , 1984 .

[9]  G. F. Ward,et al.  The Effects of Head-Up Display (HUD) Pitch Ladder Articulation, Pitch Number Location and Horizon Line Length on Unusual Attitude Recoveries for the F-16 , 1990 .

[10]  Pamela S. Tsang,et al.  Absolute Magnitude Estimation and Relative Judgement Approaches to Subjective Workload Assessment , 1987 .

[11]  Samuel G. Schiflett,et al.  Measures of in-flight workload. , 1989 .

[12]  Pamela S. Tsang,et al.  Cognitive demands of automation in aviation. , 1989 .

[13]  M. A. Vidulich,et al.  The Use of Judgment Matrices in Subjective Workload Assessment: The Subjective Workload Dominance (SWORD) Technique , 1989 .

[14]  Richard L Newman,et al.  Operational Problems Associated with Head-Up Displays during Instrument Flight. , 1980 .

[15]  W. E. Collins,et al.  Spatial disorientation in general aviation accidents. , 1978, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.

[16]  Barry H. Kantowitz,et al.  Human workload in aviation , 1988 .

[17]  A. Rapoport,et al.  A Comparison of the Eigenvalue Method and The Geometric Mean Procedure for Ratio Scaling , 1986 .

[18]  G. A. Miller.  THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[19]  Robert G. Eggleston,et al.  A Preliminary Evaluation of a Projective Workload Assessment Procedure , 1984 .

[20]  A. O. Dick,et al.  Operator Workload: Comprehensive Review and Evaluation of Operator Workload Methodologies , 1989 .

[21]  John M. Reising,et al.  Head-up display symbology for unusual attitude recovery , 1988, Proceedings of the IEEE 1988 National Aerospace and Electronics Conference.