Abstract : In the ever-increasing realm of "high-tech" Soldier systems, one factor remains fairly constant: the human factor. The use of multiple high-tech and increasingly complex systems is intended to add capabilities to Soldiers and to reduce stress and workload. However, these systems may add increased levels of stress and workload onto Soldiers who are already at heightened levels of each because of the environments in which the systems are employed. To gauge what levels of stress and workload are being impinged upon these Soldiers, researchers have used a small number of tools at their disposal. The two primary tools used are self-report surveys and salivary amylase. Surveys are quick and cheap but subjective, while salivary amylase tests are objective but time-consuming, intrusive, and expensive. As requirements increase to incorporate larger numbers of high-tech and more complex systems with Soldier-in-the-loop (SIL) systems, researchers will need a method to gather stress data in an accurate, timely, and less intrusive manner. This report discusses the use of a third method to measure Soldier stress: galvanic skin response (GSR). The first step of this process compared the survey method with the GSR method to determine if GSR data are similar to survey stress data in terms of statistics and trends. The ultimate goal of the research (this phase and ensuing research) is to determine if the GSR method is a suitable "middle ground" between the survey method and the salivary amylase method. GSR has the potential to provide researchers with a tool for objectively measuring Soldier stress that is quick, effective, and unobtrusive during research, training, and operational conditions. Stress levels were tested with soldiers using a head-tracked sensor suite (HTSS), aided target recognition technology, and a crew-aiding behavior interface. Results of the survey-GSR comparison and recommendations for ensuing research are presented.
[1]
C. Kirschbaum,et al.
Psychosocial Stress‐Induced Activation of Salivary Alpha‐Amylase: An Indicator of Sympathetic Activity?
,
2004,
Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences.
[2]
Steve Scheiner,et al.
Effects of Crew-Aiding Behaviors on Soldier Performance During Target Engagement Tasks in a Virtual Battlefield Simulation
,
2007
.
[3]
Douglas A. Granger,et al.
Asymmetry between salivary cortisol and α-amylase reactivity to stress: Relation to aggressive behavior in adolescents
,
2006,
Psychoneuroendocrinology.
[4]
Nicolas Rohleder,et al.
Human salivary alpha-amylase reactivity in a psychosocial stress paradigm.
,
2005,
International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.
[5]
Bruce S. McEwen,et al.
Biobehavioral Stress Response: Protective And Damaging Effects
,
2004
.
[6]
Gerald A. Hudgens,et al.
Salivary α‐amylase as a measure of endogenous adrenergic activity
,
1996
.
[7]
Douglas A. Granger,et al.
Salivary α-amylase response to competition: Relation to gender, previous experience, and attitudes
,
2006,
Psychoneuroendocrinology.
[8]
Nicolas Rohleder,et al.
The psychosocial stress-induced increase in salivary alpha-amylase is independent of saliva flow rate.
,
2006,
Psychophysiology.
[9]
M. Yamaguchi,et al.
Performance evaluation of salivary amylase activity monitor.
,
2004,
Biosensors & bioelectronics.
[10]
R. L. Marca,et al.
Stress-induced changes in human salivary alpha-amylase activity—associations with adrenergic activity
,
2006,
Psychoneuroendocrinology.