Individual differences in tracking

The present experiment compared differences in response strategy of participants performing a two-dimensional tracking task at three different levels of task difficulty. Twelve participants tracked an iconic aeroplane target as accurately as possible for nine repeated trials each of 5 min duration. The random input and individual response output were calculated in terms of direction and velocity. Specifically, for each 200-ms sample period, a calculated combination of eight trajectories and three velocities provided a 24 combinatorial description of both random input and participant response. Distributions across these combinations represent descriptive results and reflect individual characteristics. The distributions were compared using the technique of correspondence factor analysis. The outcome of this multidimensional method was that first, between-participants discrimination was best served by the up-vertical and low-velocity combination and, second, that the former pattern typified poor performers, while more skilled individuals used all directional options at the highest velocity level. Implications for individualized controls are examined.

[1]  K. J. Craik Theory of the human operator in control systems; man as an element in a control system. , 1948, British Journal of Psychology General Section.

[2]  B. Fingleton Models of Category Counts , 1984 .

[3]  Theodosios Pavlidis,et al.  Structural pattern recognition , 1977 .

[4]  P. Viviani,et al.  Visuo-Manual Pursuit Tracking of Human Two-Dimensional Movements , 1987 .

[5]  A. D. Gordon,et al.  Correspondence Analysis Handbook. , 1993 .

[6]  Duane T. McRuer,et al.  A Review of Quasi-Linear Pilot Models , 1967 .

[7]  Peter A. Hancock,et al.  The Effects of Practice on Tracking and Subjective Workload , 1989 .

[8]  H. J. Smith Human Describing Functions Measured in Flight and on Simulators , 1967 .

[9]  Gary M. Sandquist Introduction to System Science , 1984 .

[10]  George A. Bekey,et al.  Model of the Adaptive Behavior of the Human Operator in Response to a Sudden Change in the Control Situation , 1969 .

[11]  K. J. Craik THEORY OF THE HUMAN OPERATOR IN CONTROL SYSTEMS , 1948 .

[12]  A. Abdel-Malek,et al.  A model of human operator behavior during pursuit manual tracking-what does it reveal? , 1990, 1990 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Conference Proceedings.

[13]  P A Hancock,et al.  Influence of task demand characteristics on workload and performance. , 1995, The International journal of aviation psychology.

[14]  H. P. Birmingham,et al.  A Design Philosophy for Man-Machine Control Systems , 1954, Proceedings of the IRE.

[15]  T Radil,et al.  Two-dimensional manual tracking of periodic movements: event and time interval analyses. , 1992, International journal of psychophysiology : official journal of the International Organization of Psychophysiology.

[16]  Thomas B. Sheridan,et al.  One handed tracking in six degrees of freedom , 1989, Conference Proceedings., IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.

[17]  Walter W. Johnson,et al.  Modeling human visuo-motor strategy during vehicle control , 1990, 1990 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Conference Proceedings.

[18]  K. J. W. Craik Theory of the human operator in control systems; the operator as an engineering system. , 1947 .

[19]  R. Mead,et al.  The Design of Experiments , 1989 .

[20]  Ryojun Ikeura,et al.  Teaching of robot task by manual control-iterative modification by a human operator , 1990, 1990 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Conference Proceedings.

[21]  David L. Kleinman,et al.  A Model for Human Controller Remnant , 1969 .