Re-viewing reality: human factors of synthetic training environments

Computer-based training (CBT) has become an important training tool and is used effectively in providing part-task activities. In the military domain virtual environments (VEs) have long been exploited, mainly through virtual reality (VR), to create realistic working environments. More recently, augmented reality (AR) and advanced embedded training (AET) concepts have also emerged and the development of “AR-AET” and “VR-CBT” concepts promise to become essential tools within military training. Whilst the advantages of both AR and VR are attractive, the challenges for delivering such applications are, generally, technology led. Equally as important, however, is the incorporation of human factors design and implementation techniques and this has been recognized by the development and publication of International Standard ISO 13407, Human-Centred Design Processes for Interactive Systems. Examples described in this paper serve to review Human Factors issues associated with the use of both AR and VR training systems. Whilst there are common issues between AR and VR applications in considering the potential of synthetic training environments, it is also necessary to address particular human-centred design issues within each application domain.

[1]  Valerie J. Gawron,et al.  Guide for Human Performance Measurements , 1990 .

[2]  Carl Machover,et al.  Virtual reality , 1994, IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications.

[3]  Alex W. Stedmon,et al.  Helpful Feedback? Deriving Guidelines for Advanced Training Systems , 1999 .

[4]  David Meister Human Factors Testing and Evaluation , 1986 .

[5]  Robert Stone,et al.  Virtual reality for interactive training: an industrial practitioner's viewpoint , 2001, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

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

[7]  Wayne Zachary,et al.  The Use of Executable Cognitive Models in Simulation-Based Intelligent Embedded Training , 1997 .

[8]  L. Standing Learning 10000 pictures , 1973 .

[9]  M. Hanson Contemporary ergonomics 1998 , 1998 .

[10]  John R. Wilson,et al.  Measurement of presence and its consequences in virtual environments , 2000, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[11]  John R. Wilson,et al.  Virtual environments and ergonomics: needs and opportunities , 1997 .

[12]  Alex W. Stedmon,et al.  Old Theories, New Technologies: Comprehension and Retention Issues in Augmented Reality Systems , 1999 .

[13]  R. Hutton,et al.  Applied cognitive task analysis (ACTA): a practitioner's toolkit for understanding cognitive task demands. , 1998, Ergonomics.

[14]  L. Standing Learning 10,000 pictures. , 1973, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[15]  Donald Vreuls,et al.  Human-System Performance Measurement in Training Simulators , 1985 .

[16]  Barry Kirwan,et al.  A Guide To Task Analysis: The Task Analysis Working Group , 1992 .

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

[18]  A. L. Young,et al.  The potential of augmented reality technology for training support systems , 1999 .

[19]  C. Wickens Engineering psychology and human performance, 2nd ed. , 1992 .

[20]  G. A. Giraldi,et al.  Introduction to Augmented Reality , 2003 .

[21]  Jonathan Earthy,et al.  The improvement of human-centred processes-facing the challenge and reaping the benefit of ISO 13407 , 2001, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[22]  Steven K. Feiner,et al.  Knowledge-based augmented reality , 1993, CACM.

[23]  Howard Rheingold,et al.  Virtual Reality , 1991 .

[24]  Ronald Azuma,et al.  Tracking requirements for augmented reality , 1993, CACM.

[25]  A. W. Stedmon,et al.  It's not What you Wear, it's How you Wear it: Human Factors of Wearable Computers , 1999 .

[26]  Roy Kalawsky,et al.  Old theories, new technologies: cumulative clutter effects using augmented reality , 1999, 1999 IEEE International Conference on Information Visualization (Cat. No. PR00210).