Cognitive factors in aviation display design

Three-dimensional perspectives are being considered for a variety of applications, such as conformal HUD imagery, tunnel primary flight displays, enhanced terrain renderings to supplement GPWS, traffic and weather displays, or displays of FMS automation modes (Owen and Suiter, 1997). In considering the strengths and limitations of such displays, in either head-up or head-down location, the designer and human factors practitioner must carefully evaluate the weaknesses of each (keyhole, distortion, and compellingness of the immersed perspective; ambiguity of the tethered perspective), as well as the task factors that may modulate the negative impact of these weaknesses. These factors must be contrasted with the visual scanning imposed by standard planar or coplanar head down displays. It is also the case that a number of these weaknesses may be partially offset by introducing various cognitive "remediations" such as visual momentum or artificial frameworks, which we do not address in this paper (but see Olmos et al., 1997; Ellis, 1993). Thus effective "pilot centered" cockpit design cannot rely exclusively on the 3D graphics technology offered by the computer engineer, but must receive the input from the human factors community.

[1]  Stephen R. Ellis,et al.  Pictorial Communication: Pictures and the Synthetic Universe , 1991 .

[2]  R. F. Haines,et al.  Cognitive issues in head-up displays , 1980 .

[3]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Navigational Checking Using 3D Maps: The Influence of Elevation Angle, Azimuth, and Foreshortening , 1998, Hum. Factors.

[4]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The Proximity Compatibility Principle: Its Psychological Foundation and Relevance to Display Design , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[5]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Frames of Reference for Navigation , 1999 .

[6]  Arthur J. Grunwald.  Tunnel display for four-dimensional fixed-wing aircraft approaches , 1984 .

[7]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The implications of data-link for representing pilot request information on 2D and 3D air traffic control displays , 1996 .

[8]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Two- and Three-Dimensional Displays for Aviation: A Theoretical and Empirical Comparison , 1993 .

[9]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Tactical Displays for Combat Awareness: An Examination of Dimensionality and Frame of Reference Concepts and the Application of Cognitive Engineering , 2000 .

[10]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Costs and Benefits of Head-Up Display Use: A Meta-Analytic Approach , 1998 .

[11]  David C. Foyle,et al.  Attentional Issues with Superimposed Symbology: Formats for Scene-Linked Displays , 1995 .

[12]  Patricia May Ververs,et al.  Prepared for , 1998 .

[13]  Tyler T Prevett,et al.  Exploring the dimensions of egocentricity in aircraft navigation displays , 1995 .

[14]  Richard S. Jensen,et al.  Prediction and Quickening In Perspective Flight Displays for Curved Landing Approaches , 1981 .

[15]  E Theunissen.  INFLUENCE OF ERROR GAIN AND POSITION PREDICTION ON TRACKING PERFORMANCE AND CONTROL ACTIVITY WITH PERSPECTIVE FLIGHT PATH DISPLAYS. , 1995 .

[16]  John M. Reising,et al.  A Comparison of Two Head up Display Formats Used to Fly Curved Instrument Approaches , 1995 .

[17]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Perspective Displays for Air Traffic Control: Display of Terrain and Weather , 1995 .

[18]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Superimposition, Symbology, Visual Attention, and the Head-Up Display , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[19]  C D Wickens,et al.  Head-Up Displays: Effect of Clutter, Display Intensity, and Display Location on Pilot Performance , 1998 .

[20]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Perspective Flight Path Displays: Application Of Ergonomically Driven Display Design Principles , 1988, Proceedings of the 1988 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[21]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Object versus space-based models of visual attention: Implications for the design of head-up displays , 1995 .

[22]  Mark Nataupsky,et al.  Stereo 3-D and non-stereo presentations of a computer-generated pictorial primary flight display with pathway augmentation , 1988 .

[23]  C D Wickens,et al.  Electronic maps for terminal area navigation: effects of frame of reference and dimensionality. , 1996, The International journal of aviation psychology.

[24]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Electronic Map Evaluation in Simulated Visual Meteorological Conditions , 1997 .

[25]  S R Ellis,et al.  The Effect of Perspective Geometry on Judged Direction in Spatial Information Instruments , 1986, Human factors.

[26]  David C. Foyle,et al.  Scene-Linked Symbology to Improve Situation Awareness , 1996 .

[27]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  3-D Electronic Maps, Design Implications for the Effects of Elevation Angle Disparity, Complexity, and Feature Type , 1997 .