The critical visual capabilities of detection, discrimination, recognition, identification and judgment are reviewed in connection with the acquisition, homing and docking phases of space rendezvous. The inadequacies of existing sources of data, especially in interaction effects, and the need for the presentation of data in a form permitting specific predictions are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArnoultM. D.Stimulus predifferentiation: Some generalizations and hypotheses. Psychol. Bull., 1957, 54, 339–350.
BakerC. A.SteedmanW. C.Perceived movement in depth as a function of luminance and velocity. Human Factors, 1961, 3, 166–173.
5.
BrownR. H.The visual discrimination of velocity as a function of the rate of movement and other factors. NRL Rep. No. 4299, Office of Naval Research, Washington, D.C: 1954.
6.
BrownR. H.Analysis of visual sensitivity to differences in velocity. NRL Rep. No. 5478, Wash., D.C.: 1960.
7.
BrownR. H.Visual sensitivity to differences in velocity. Psychol. Bull., 1961, 58, 89–103.
8.
BrownR. H.CarlJ. M.Visibility in an empty visual field. NRL Rep. No. 5072, Wash., D.C.: 1958.
9.
GibsonJ. J.Perception of the visual worldBoston: Houghton Mifflin, 1950.
10.
GilinskyA. S.Perceived size and distance in visual space. Psychol. Rev., 1951, 58, 460–482.
11.
GulledgeI. S.KoomenM. J.PackerD. M.TouseyR.Visual thresholds for detecting an earth satellite. Science, 1958, 127, 1242–1243.
12.
KastenD. F.Human performance in short orbital transfer. Unpublished manuscript, 6570th Aerospace Medical Res. Lab., Wright-Patterson Airforce Base, Ohio: 1962.
13.
LudvighE.MillerJ. W.A study of dynamic visual acuity. Joint Project Report No. NM1075, 01.01, Pensacola, Fla.: Kresge Eye Institute and Naval School of Aviat. Med., 1953.
14.
MandriotaF. J.MintzD. E.NottermanJ. M.Visual velocity discrimination: Effects of spatial and temporal cues. Science, 1962, 138, 437–438.
15.
MillerJ. W. (Ed.). Visual problems of space travel. Nat. Acad. Sci.-Nat. Research Council Bull., 1962.
16.
MillerJ. W.LudvighE.The perception of movement persistence in the Ganzfeld. J. opt. Soc. Amer., 1961, 51, 57–60.
17.
StevensS. S.Handbook of experimental psychologyNew York: Wiley, 1951.
18.
VanderplasJ. M.Transfer of training and its relation to perceptual learning and recognition. Psychol. Rev., 1958, 65, 375–385.
19.
VanderplasJ. M.GarvinE. A.Complexity, association value, and practice as factors in shape recognition following paired-associates training. J. exp. Psychol., 1959, 57, 155–163.
20.
WhitesideT. C. D.Vision in an empty visual field, a subjective technique for the measurement of accommodation. Cambridge, England: Flying Personnel Research Committee, RAF Inst. Aviat. Med. Rep. No. 850, 1953.
21.
WulfeckJ. W.TaylorJ. H.Form discrimination as related to military problems. Nat. Acad. Sci.-Nat. Research Council Publ. No. 561, 1957.
22.
WulfeckJ. W.WeiszA.RabenM. W. (Eds.). Vision in military aviation. U.S.A.F. WADC Tech. Report No. 58–399, Wright Air Development CenterWright-Patterson AFB, Ohio: 1958.
23.
WulfeckJ. W.ZeittenL. R.Human capabilities and limitations. In GagneR. M. (Ed.), Psychological Principles in System Development. New York: Rinehart and Winston, 1962.
