Background. Air traffic controllers need to use their cognitive resources to cope with multiple tasks while monitoring air traffic. They are trained through advanced 3D simulators; however, they might demonstrate simulator sickness symptoms during this training. The relationship between multitasking and simulator sickness and the influence of different tasks on these variables can be investigated to inform further training practices for an efficient traffic monitoring.
Purpose. The purpose of this quasi-experimental research was to explore the influence of different working positions and multitasking scenarios on simulator sickness and performance in 3D Aerodrome Control Training.
Method. Thirteen undergraduate students from a civil aviation school participated in a time-series experimental design. Nausea, disorientation and oculomotor disturbances were measured before and after conducting different multitasking scenarios in an aerodrome control simulator. A 20-item simulation performance scale was also used. Performance differences and the relationship between simulator sickness and performance were addressed through parametric tests.
Results. Findings revealed that tower-ground positions created higher levels of nausea. Performance scores varied in different scenarios. Simulator sickness was higher in females. Total sickness correlated negatively with performance in all scenarios.
Conclusion. Certain tasks have different influences on both simulator sickness and performance. Concurrent multitasking seems to trigger simulator sickness further. The degree of simulator adaptation, test anxiety and physiological measures of the process should be considered in further research.
AdlerR. F. (2012). Performance effects of computer-based multitasking behavior (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). City University of New York, New York.
2.
AkbulutY.ÖrünÖ (2017, November). Is using electroencephalography intrusive to computer assisted multitasking performance?Paper presented at the 2017 AECT International Convention, Jacksonville, FL.
BensonA. J. (2002). Motion sickness. In PandolfK. B.BurrR. E. (Eds.), Medical aspects of harsh environments (pp. 1048-1083). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of the Army, Office of the Surgeon General. Retrieved from http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a433963.pdf
5.
BraverM. C. W.BraverS. L. (1988). Statistical treatment of the Solomon four-group design: A meta-analytic approach. Psychological Bulletin, 104(1), 150-154. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.104.1.150
CampG.PaasF.RikersR.van MerrienboerJ. (2001). Dynamic problem selection in air traffic control training: A comparison between performance, mental effort and mental efficiency. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(5-6), 575-595. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00028-0
8.
CampbellD. T.StanleyJ. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
9.
CarrierL. M.CheeverN. A.RosenL. D.BenitezS.ChangJ. (2009). Multitasking across generations: Multitasking choices and difficulty ratings in three generations of Americans. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(2), 483-489. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.10.012
10.
CassadyJ. C.JohnsonR. E. (2002). Cognitive test anxiety and academic performance. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 27(2), 270-295. doi:10.1006/ceps.2001.1094
11.
ChaloulosG.CrückE.LygerosJ. (2010). A simulation based study of subliminal control for air traffic management. Transportation Research Part C, 18, 963-974. doi:10.1016/j.trc.2010.03.002
12.
ChangY.-H.YehC.-H. (2010). Human performance interfaces in air traffic control. Applied Ergonomics, 41, 123-129. doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2009.06.002
13.
ClemesS. A.HowarthP. A. (2005). The menstrual cycle and susceptibility to virtual simulator sickness. Journal of Biological Rhythms, 20(1), 71-82. doi:10.1177/0748730404272567
14.
CobbS. V. G.NicholsS.RamseyA.WilsonJ. R. (1999). Virtual reality induced symptoms and effects (VRISE). Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 8(2), 169-186. doi:10.1162/105474699566152
15.
CoensJ.DegryseE.SenecautM. P.CottynJ.ClareboutG. (2011). Listening to an educational podcast while walking or jogging: Can students really multitask?International Journal of Mobile and Blended Learning, 3(3), 23-33. Retrieved from https://www.igi-global.com/gateway/article/56331
16.
CoensJ.ReynvoetB.ClareboutG. (2011). Mobile learning: Can students really multitask?Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 20(1), 5-20. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/33269/
17.
ColomR.Martínez-MolinaA.ShihP. C.SantacreuJ. (2010). Intelligence, working memory, and multitasking performance. Intelligence, 38(6), 543-551. doi:10.1016/j.intell.2010.08.002
18.
de WinterJ.KuipersJ. (2017). Relationships between years of licensure and driving style measured with a short simulator-based test. In: StantonN. A.LandryS.Di BucchianicoG.VallicelliA. (Eds.), Advances in human aspects of transportation (pp. 641-654). Springer International Publishing, Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-41682-3_54
19.
DindarM.AkbulutY. (2016). Effects of multitasking on retention and topic interest. Learning and Instruction, 41, 94-105. doi:10.1016/j.learninstruc.2015.10.005
20.
DjokicJ.LorenzB.FrickeH. (2010). Air traffic control complexity as workload driver. Transportation Research Part C, 18, 930-936. doi:10.1016/j.trc.2010.03.005
21.
DönmezO.AkbulutY. (2016). Siber zorbalık çalışmalarında sosyal beğenirlik etmeni [Social desirability bias in cyberbullying research]. Educational Technology: Theory and Practice, 6(2), 1-18. doi:10.17943/etku.19033
22.
DoolittleP. E.MarianoG. J. (2008). Working memory capacity and mobile multimedia learning environments: Individual differences in learning while mobile. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 17(4), 511-530. Retrieved from https://www.learntechlib.org/p/26079/
23.
EllisY.DanielsB.JaureguiA. (2010). The effect of multitasking on the grade performance of business students. Research in Higher Education Journal, 8(1). Retrieved from http://www.w.aabri.com/manuscripts/10498.pdf
24.
EmotoM.SugawaraM.NojiriY. (2008). Viewing angle dependency of visually-induced motion sickness in viewing wide-field images by subjective and autonomic nervous indices. Displays, 29(2), 90-99. doi:10.1016/j.displa.2007.09.010
HaleL. T.LongP. A. (2017, September). How accurately can an observer assess participant self-reported workload? In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 61, No. 1, pp. 1486-1487). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. doi:10.1177/1541931213601856
28.
HarmD. L.TaylorL. C.BloombergJ. J. (2007). Adaptive changes in sensorimotor coordination and motion sickness following repeated exposures to virtual environments (Technical report). League City, TX: NASA Human Research Program Investigators’ Meeting. Retrieved from https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=20070006524
29.
HuckS. W. (2012). Reading statistics and research (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
30.
JaegerB. K.MourantR. R. (2001). Comparison of simulator sickness using static and dynamic walking simulators. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 45, 1896-1900. doi:10.1177/154193120104502709
31.
JeurisS.BardramJ. E. (2016). Dedicated workspaces: Faster resumption times and reduced cognitive load in sequential multitasking. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 404-414. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.059
32.
JonesM. B.KennedyR. S.StanneyK. M. (2004). Toward systematic control of cybersickness. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 13(5), 589-600. doi:10.1162/1054746042545247
33.
KennedyR. S.HettingerL. J.LilienthalM. G. (1990). Simulator sickness. In CramptonG. H. (Ed.), Motion and space sickness (pp. 317-341). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
34.
KennedyR. S.LaneN. E.BerbaumK. S.LilienthalM. G. (1993). Simulator Sickness Questionnaire: An enhanced method for quantifying simulator sickness. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3(3), 203-220. doi:10.1207/s15327108ijap0303_3
35.
KennedyR. S.StanneyK. M.DunlapW. P. (2000). Duration and exposure to virtual environments: Sickness curves during and across sessions. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 9(5), 463-472. doi:10.1162/105474600566952
36.
KeshavarzB.HechtH. (2011). Validating an efficient method to quantify motion sickness. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 53(4), 415-426. doi:10.1177/0018720811403736
37.
KimY. Y.KimH. J.KimE. N.KoH. D.KimH. T. (2005). Characteristic changes in the physiological components of cybersickness. Psychophysiology, 42(5), 616-625. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2005.00349.x
38.
KolasinskiE. M.GoldbergS. L.HillerJ. H. (1995). Simulator sickness in virtual environments (Technical Report 1027). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences. Retrieved from http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a295861.pdf
39.
KraushaarJ. M.NovakD. C. (2010). Examining the affects of student multitasking with laptops during the lecture. Journal of Information Systems Education, 21(2), 241-251.
40.
KroenkeK.SpitzerR. L. (1998). Gender differences in the reporting of physical and somatoform symptoms. Psychosomatic Medicine, 60(2), 150-155. doi:10.1097/00006842-199803000-00006
MarajC. S.Badillo-UrquiolaK. A.MartinezS. G.StevensJ. A.MaxwellD. B. (2017). Exploring the impact of simulator sickness on the virtual world experience. In: KantolaJ.BarathT.NazirS.AndreT. (Eds.), Advances in human factors, business management, training and education (pp. 635-643). Springer International Publishing, Cham. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-42070-7_59
43.
MerhiO.FaugloireE.FlanaganM.StoffregenT. A. (2007). Motion sickness, console video games, and head-mounted displays. Human Factors, 49(5), 920-934. doi:10.1518/001872007X230262
44.
NesbittK.DavisS.BlackmoreK.NalivaikoE. (2017). Correlating reaction time and nausea measures with traditional measures of cybersickness. Displays, 48, 1-8. doi:10.1016/j.displa.2017.01.002
45.
OphirE.NassC.WagnerA. D. (2009). Cognitive control in media multitaskers. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(37), 15583–15587. doi:10.1073/pnas.0903620106
46.
ÖrünÖ.AkbulutY. (2016, July). Effect of different multitasking scenarios realized in different physical settings on cognitive load and achievement. Paper presented at the 8th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies (EDULEARN16), Barcelona, Spain. Retrieved from https://library.iated.org/view/ORUN2016EFF
47.
ParkG. D.AllenR. W.FiorentinoD.RosenthalT. J.CookM. L. (2006). Simulator sickness scores according to symptom susceptibility, age, and gender for an older driver assessment study. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 50, 2702-2706. doi:10.1177/154193120605002607
48.
PashlerH.KangS. H.IpR. Y. (2013). Does multitasking ımpair studying? Depends on timing. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 27(5), 593-599. doi:10.1002/acp.2919
ReasonJ. T.BrandJ. J. (1975). Motion sickness. London, England: Academic Press.
51.
RebenitschL.OwenC. (2016). Review on cybersickness in applications and visual displays. Virtual Reality, 20(2), 101-125. doi:10.1007/s10055-016-0285-9
52.
RieckeB. E.FreibergJ. B.GrechkinT. Y. (2015). Can walking motions improve visually induced rotational self-motion illusions in virtual reality?Journal of Vision, 15(2), 1-15. doi:10.1167/15.2.3
53.
RonenA.YairN. (2013). The adaptation period to a driving simulator. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 18, 94-106. doi:10.1016/j.trf.2012.12.007
54.
SalvucciD. D.TaatgenN. A.BorstJ. P. (2009, April). Toward a unified theory of the multitasking continuum: From concurrent performance to task switching, interruption, and resumption. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1819-1828). ACM. Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1518981
55.
SanaF.WestonT.CepedaN. J. (2013). Laptop multitasking hinders classroom learning for both users and nearby peers. Computers & Education, 62, 24-31. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.003
56.
SharplesS.CobbS.MoodyA.WilsonJ. R. (2008). Virtual reality induced symptoms and effects (VRISE): Comparison of head mounted display (HMD), desktop and projection display systems. Displays, 29(2), 58-69. doi:10.1016/j.displa.2007.09.005
57.
SmitherJ. A. A.MoulouaM.KennedyR. (2008). Reducing symptoms of visually induced motion sickness through perceptual training. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 18(4), 326-339. doi:10.1080/10508410802346921
58.
SolomonR. L. (1949). An extension of control group design. Psychological Bulletin, 46, 137-150. doi:10.1037/h0062958
59.
SrivastavaJ. (2013). Media multitasking performance: Role of message relevance and formatting cues in online environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 888-895. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.12.023
60.
StanneyK. M.KennedyR. S.DrexlerJ. M. (1997, October). Cybersickness is not simulator sickness. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 1138-1142). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. doi:10.1177/107118139704100292
61.
StanneyK. M.KingdonK. S.NahmensI.KennedyR. S. (2003). What to expect from immersive virtual environment exposure: Influences of age, gender, body mass index, and past experience. Human Factors, 45(3), 504-520. doi:10.1518/hfes.45.3.504.27254
62.
SternR. M. (2002). The psychophysiology of nausea. Acta Biologica Hungarica, 53(4), 589-600. doi:10.1556/ABiol.53.2002.4.17
63.
StoffregenT. A.FaugloireE.YoshidaK.FlanaganM. B.MerhiO. (2008). Motion sickness and postural sway in console video games. Human Factors, 50, 322-331. doi:10.1518/001872008X250755
64.
StoffregenT. A.HettingerL. J.HaasM. W.RoeM. M.SmartL. J. (2000). Postural instability and motion sickness in a fixed-base flight simulator. Human Factors, 42, 458-469. doi:10.1518/001872000779698097
