Introduction. This study investigated the relationship between spatial perception abilities and robot operation under direct-line-of-sight and teleoperation viewing conditions. This study was an effort to determine if spatial ability testing may be a useful tool in the selection of human-robot interaction (HRI) operators. Method. Participants completed eight cognitive measures and operated one of four types of robots under tasks of low and high difficulty. Performance for each participant was tested during both direct-line-of-sight and teleoperation. Results. Spatial abilities are shown to be reliable predictors of directline-of-sight and teleoperation performance. Participants in this study with higher spatial abilities completed their tasks faster and with fewer errors. Participants with higher spatial abilities were also more successful at completing the task. Discussion. Applications of these findings are discussed in terms of teleoperator selection tools, HRI training, and human-centered design recommendations.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BoltonM.BassE. (2009). Comparing Perceptual Judgment and Subjective Measures of Spatial Awareness. Applied Ergonomics, 40, 597-607.
2.
BurkeJ.MurphyR.CoovertM.RiddleD. (2004). Moonlight in Miami: A Field Study of Human-Robot Interaction in the Context of an Urban Search and Rescue Disaster Response Training Exercise. Human-Computer Interaction, 19, 85-116.
3.
ChenJ.DurlachP.SloanJ.BowensL. (2008). Human-Robot Interaction in the Context of Simulated Route Reconnaissance Missions. Military Psychology, 20, 135-149.
4.
ChenJ. (2009). Concurrent Performance of Military and Robotics Tasks and Effects of Cueing in a Simulated Multi-tasking Environment. Presence, 18(1), 1-15.
5.
EckstromR.FrenchJ.HarmanH.DermenD. (1976). Manual for Kit of Factor-Referenced Cognitive Tests. Princeton, ETS.
6.
FoxJ. (2008). Applied regression analysis and generalized linear models (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
GallagherA.G.LeonardG.TraynorO.J. (2009). Role and Feasibility of Psychomotor and Dexterity Testing in Selection for Surgical Training. ANZ J. Surg, 79, 108-113.
8.
GomerJ.MooreK.CrislerM.KwokaM.PaganoC. (2006). VRML Use for Iterative Usability Testing of User Interfaces: A Novel Continuum Robotic Limb Example. Proceedings of the 50th Annual Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (HFES) Conference, San Francisco, CA.
9.
HartS.StavelandL. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. In HancockP.A.MeshkatiN. (Eds), Human Mental Workload (pp. 139-183). Amsterdam: North Holland.
10.
LathanC.TraceyM. (2002). The Effects of Operator Spatial Perception and Sensory Feedback on Human-Robot Teleoperation Performance. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 11(4), 368-377.
11.
LongL.O.GomerJ.A.WongJ.TPaganoC.C. (submitted). Visual Spatial Abilities in Uninhabited Ground Vehicles: Task Performance during Teleoperation and Direct Line of Sight.
12.
OvertonR. C. (2001). Moderated multiple regression for interactions involving categorical variables: A statistical control for heterogeneous variance across two groups. Psychological Methods, 6, 218-233.
13.
PakR.RogersW.FiskA. (2006). Spatial Ability Subfactors and Their Influences on a Computer-based Information Search Task. Human Factors, 48(1), 154-165.
StroopJ. (1935). Studies of Interference in serial-verbal reaction. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18, 643-662.
16.
WalkerA. D.CarpenterT., L.MossJ. D.SwitzerF.S.HooverA. W.MuthE. R. (2009). The evaluation of virtual environment training for a building clearing task. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 53rd Annual Meeting, San Antonio, TX.
17.
WechslerD. (1997). Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale (3rd Ed.). San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.
