This study provides data regarding the use of object displays and schematic face displays to present dynamic, multivariate system information. Twelve subjects detected and diagnosed failures in a system whose variables were intercorrelated. Three visual, analog displays–a bar graph display, a pentagon, and a schematic face display–represented the system. These displays differed in the degree of integrality of their component features. Detection performance yielded a speed/accuracy tradeoff with little evidence of superiority for any of the displays. However, diagnosis performance showed a superiority of the more separable display. This superiority was attributed to showed a superiority of the more separable display. This superiority was attributed to the fact that diagnosis required subjects to focus attention directly on a single attribute, a focusing that benefitted from a display that separated the attributes from each other.
[1]
Shane Moriarity,et al.
Communicating Financial Information Through Multidimensional Graphics
,
1979
.
[2]
J. A. Landeweerd,et al.
Internal representation of a process, fault diagnosis and fault correction
,
1979
.
[3]
Neville Moray.
The Role of Attention in the Detection of Errors and the Diagnosis of Failures in Man-Machine Systems
,
1981
.
[4]
Lisanne Bainbridge,et al.
Mathematical Equations or Processing Routines
,
1981
.
[5]
Robert J. K. Jacob,et al.
The Face as a Data Display
,
1976
.
[6]
J H Siegel,et al.
Pattern and process in the evolution of human septic shock.
,
1971,
Surgery.