Identifying Battlefield Information Collection Strategies to Support ‘Every Soldier is a Sensor’ Training

Abstract

The trend towards network-centric warfare has been accompanied by a shift towards the ‘Every Soldier is a Sensor’ (ES2) concept where battlefield information collection is completed by regular soldiers within a company/platoon (U.S. Army, 2008). To support the development of ES2 training we investigated a priori battlefield information collection strategies. Twenty military participants completed a reconnaissance mission in a virtual environment during which multiple events occurred. Participants decided whether or not to collect information about these events. After the mission participants categorized events as having an Information Type (Population, Geography, Hostile) and a Relevance (for Current Operations, Future Operations, or Command and Control). Results suggest that across individuals neither Information Type nor Relevance predicts the probability of recording information although Geographic events were slightly more influential. Within participants there was a somewhat stable collection pattern. The results highlight the importance of training for ES2 and provide a starting point for developing training programs.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Association of the United States Army. ES2: Every Soldier is a Sensor. August, 2004.

Clark

R. E.

Yates

Early

Moulton

(2010). An analysis of the failure of electronic media and discovery-based learning: Evidence for the performance benefits of guided training methods. In Silber

K. H.

Foshay

(Eds.). Handbook of training and improving workplace performance, Volume I: Instructional design and training delivery. Washington, DC: International Society for Performance Improvement.

Clark

R.E.

Estes

(1998). Cognitive task analysis for training. International Journal of Educational Research, 25(5), 403-417.

Cummings

M.L.

Human Supervisory Control Challenges in Network Centric Operations, Unmanned Vehicle Systems Canada, Alberta, Canada, Nov., 2005.

Fowlkes

J. E.

Burke

C.S.

(2005). Event-based approach to training (EBAT). In Stanton

Hedge

Brookhuis

Salas

Hendrick

(Ed.), Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics Methods (pp. 47-41 - 47-45). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.

Sottilare

R.A.

(1005). Improving soldier learning and performance through simulation and training technologies. Army Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology (Army AL&T), May-June, 31-35.

Giffort

D.W.

(1998). A systems approach to developing staff training. New Directions for Mental Health Services, 79, 25-33.

International Atomic Energy Agency. (1996). Nuclear Power Plant Personnel Training and its Evaluation, A Guidebook, IAEA Technical Report Series No. 380, IAEA.

Krupenia

Cuizinaud

Muller

van der Hulst

(2012). Collecting battlefield information using a multimodal Personal Digital Assistant. In de Waard

Merat

Jamson

Barnard

Carsten

(Eds.) (2012), Human Factors of Systems and Technology. Maastricht, the Netherlands: Shaker Publishing.

10.

Redding

R.E.

(1989). Perspectives on Cognitive Task Analysis: The state of the art. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 33rd Annual Meeting, 1348-1352. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.

11.

U.S. Army. (2008). The Warrior Ethos and Soldier Combat Skills. Field Manual 3-21.75, Washington, D.C: Headquarters, Dept. of the Army.

12.

United States of America Department of Defence (2001). Network-Centric Warfare. Department of Defense Report to Congress, 27 July 2001.

13.

United States of America Department of Defense (2005). The Implementation of Network-Centric Warfare. Office of Force Transformation.