Selecting the appropriate display format for time-constrained tasks is the focus of the research presented in this paper. The effect of time stress on operator performance was assessed by manipulating the time available to process the display. Twenty people were trained as operators and instructed to identify the state of a system using either a digital display or a polygon display. Participants were required to reach a prespecified criterion in training and were then tested under?. time-constrained conditions. Time constraints were set at 100%, 50%, and 25% of each person's mean unpaced response times obtained during training. Results showed that response to the time constrained conditions was significantly affected by uncertainty and the type of display format. Discussion focuses on the effects of time stress on performance and the selection of displays for time-constrained tasks.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CarswellC. M., and WickensC. D. (1987). Information integration and the object display: An interaction of task demands and display superiority. Ergonomics, 30, 511–527.
2.
CarswellC. M., and WickensC. D. (1990). The perceptual interaction of graphical attributes: Configurality, stimulus homogeneity, and object integration. Perception & Psychophysics, 47, 157–168.
3.
CouryB. G., BouletteM. D., and SmithR. A. (1989). The impact of uncertainty on classification of multidimensional data with integral and separable displays. Human Factors, 31, 551–569.
4.
CouryB. G., and DruryC. G. (1986). The effects of pacing on complex decision-making inspection performance. Ergonomics, 29, 489–508.
5.
CouryB. G., and PietrasC. M. (1989). Alphanumeric and graphic displays for dynamic process monitoring and control. Ergonomics, 32, 1373–1389.
6.
CouryB. G., Zubritzky-WeilandM., and CuQlock-KnoppV. G. (1992). Probing the mental models of system state categories with multidimensional scaling. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 36, 673–696.
7.
DeGrootM. H. (1970). Optimal statistical decisions. New York: McGraw-Hill.
8.
DoughertyE. R. (1990). Probability and statistics. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
9.
GarnerW. R. (1974). The processing of information and structure. New York: Wiley.
10.
GarnerW. R. (1978). Selective attention to attributes and stimuli. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 107, 287–308.
11.
GoldsmithT. E., and SchvaneveldtR. W. (1984). Facilitating multiple-cue judgments with integral information displays. In ThomasJ.C., and SchneiderM. L. (Eds.), Human factors in computer systems (pp. 243–270). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
12.
GreenD. M., and SwetsJ. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. Huntington, NY: Robert E. Krieger.
13.
HamiltonV., and WarburtonD. M. (Eds.). (1979). Human stress and cognition. New York: Wiley.
14.
HockeyR. (1984). Varieties of attentional state: The effects of environment. In ParasuramanR., and DaviesD. R. (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 449–483). New York: Academic.
15.
HogarthR. M. (1987). Judgment and choice (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.
16.
HollandJ. H., HolyoakK. J., NisbettR. E., and ThagardP. R. (1986). Induction: Processes of inference, learning, and discovery. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17.
HollnagelE., ManciniG., and WoodsD. D. (1986). Intelligent decision support in process environments. New York: Springer-Verlag.
18.
HooperK. N., CouryB.G., and TerranovaM. (1991). Team performance in dynamic systems. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting (pp. 949–953). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
19.
KahnemanD. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
20.
KahnemanD., and TriesmanA. M. (1984). Changing views of attention and automaticity. In ParasuramanR., and DaviesD. R. (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 29–61). New York: Academic.
21.
MorayN. (1984). Attention to dynamic visual displays in man-machine systems. In ParasuramanR., and DaviesD. R. (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 485–513). New York: Academic.
22.
MorganM. G., and HenrionM. (1990). Uncertainty. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23.
PomerantzJ. R. (1986). Overview of visual form perception. In SchwabE. C., and NusbaumH. C. (Eds.), Perception of speech and visual form: Theoretical issues, models, and research (vol. 2, pp. 1–30). New York: Academic.
24.
PomerantzJ. R., and PristachE. A. (1989). Emergent features, attention, and perceptual glue in visual form perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 15, 635–649.
25.
RasmussenJ. (1986). Information processing and human-machine interaction. New York: North-Holland.
26.
SalvendyG., and SmithM. (Eds.). (1981). Machine pacing and occupational stress. London: Taylor & Francis.
27.
SandersonP. M., FlachJ. M., ButtigiegM. A., and CaseyE. J. (1989). Object displays do not always support integrated task performance. Human Factors, 31, 183–198.
28.
SmithE. E., and MedinD. L. (1981). Categories and concepts. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
29.
TriesmanA. M. (1986). Properties, parts, and objects. In BoffK., KaufmannL., and ThomasJ. (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (pp. 35/1–35/70). New York: Wiley.
30.
WickensC. D. (1980). The structure of attentional resources. In NickersonR. S. (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII (pp. 239–257). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
31.
WinstonW. L. (1987). Operations research: Applications and algorithms. Boston: Duxbury.
