Limits of Display Realism : Human Factors Issues in Visualizing the Common Operational Picture

The vision for the US military’s future common operational picture (COP) is to create a display that integrates data from all service arms to promote situation awareness (SA) and coordination. This tactical display must visualize the locations of a variety of blue forces and other assets overlaid and integrated with a variety of amplifying information (planning, weather, etc). Display designers are faced with the task of visualizing this complex situation in an intuitive and useful fashion that promotes SA. A popular approach is to maximize the realism of the display, on the assumption that realism will promote natural, intuitive, and easy human interaction. To this end, technological advances have enabled designers to create real-time, realistic 3-D perspective views of the tactical picture for “at a glance” SA. However, in a series of empirical studies conducted over the last five years for the US Navy, we have found that realistic 3-D views are only appropriate for specific tasks and generally do not enhance SA. Rather, they are misperceived and promote errors. This approach to display design of maximizing realism also assumes that realistic, real-time displays will provide adequate support for detecting significant changes to a situation. However, a wealth of psychological studies have documented the tremendous human susceptibility to miss changes in natural scenes. Why would designers create, and users prefer, displays that do not serve them well? Apparently, users harbour a Naïve Realism – a misplaced faith in their ability to extract information from natural scenes that translates into a desire for realistic displays. It is paradoxical and worrying that at a time when basic perceptual science is revealing just how flawed and sparse is our visual representation of natural scenes that display designers are striving towards photo-realistic naturalism. In this talk, we review this troubling trend and layout a set of human factors guidelines and display concepts for the COP that, though sometimes counter to Naïve Realism, are likely to promote superior performance.

[1]  Harvey S. Smallman,et al.  Recovery from Interruptions to a Dynamic Monitoring Task: The Beguiling Utility of Instant Replay , 2005 .

[2]  Harvey S. Smallman,et al.  Promoting Rapid Situation Awareness in Tactical Displays: The Role of 3-D Perspective Views and Realistic Symbols , 2000 .

[3]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  When Users Want What's not Best for Them , 1995 .

[4]  Harvey S. Smallman,et al.  Chex (Change History Explicit): New HCI Concepts for Change Awareness , 2003 .

[5]  J. G. Hollands,et al.  Visual Momentum and Task Switching with 2D and 3D Displays of Geographic Terrain , 2003 .

[6]  Joseph DiVita,et al.  Verification of the Change Blindness Phenomenon While Managing Critical Events on a Combat Information Display , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[7]  Justin G. Hollands,et al.  Task Switching With 2D and 3D Displays of Geographic Terrain: The Role of Visual Momentum , 2004 .

[8]  D. Simons,et al.  Change Blindness Blindness: The Metacognitive Error of Overestimating Change-detection Ability , 2000 .

[9]  P. Cavanagh Vision is Getting Easier Every Day , 1995, Perception.

[10]  Patricia Costigan-Eaves,et al.  Edward R. Tufte The visual display of quantitative information , 1984 .

[11]  E. Schiller,et al.  Track Location Enhancements for Perspective View Displays , 2000 .

[12]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  Toward a Theory of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[13]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Animation: can it facilitate? , 2002, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[14]  J. Gregory Trafton,et al.  Preparing to resume an interrupted task: effects of prospective goal encoding and retrospective rehearsal , 2003, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

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

[16]  Ronald A. Rensink Change detection. , 2002, Annual review of psychology.

[17]  Daniel C. McFarlane,et al.  Comparison of Four Primary Methods for Coordinating the Interruption of People in Human-Computer Interaction , 2002, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[18]  Stanley N. Roscoe,et al.  Airborne Displays for Flight and Navigation , 1968 .

[19]  False Perspectives , 1981, Perception.