Evaluation of Tactile Alerts for Control Station Operation

Abstract

In complex systems, it is difficult to efficiently provide operators with timely and meaningful information. Tactile displays may alleviate visual workload by transmitting information through the skin. This study examined the utility of active tactile alerts versus salient visual and/or auditory alerts in an unmanned aerial vehicle ground control station simulation. Tactor location (right or left arm) and number of factors vibrating (one or two) were used to code three types of alerts. Results showed that tactile stimulation, when presented in concert with visual and auditory alerts, did not aid (or degrade) performance, suggesting they could substitute for auditory alerts when the aural channel is overloaded. Results also indicated that tactile alerts used as the sole cue, compared to a visual alert, improved reaction time which suggests that vibratory stimulation may be an effective non-redundant cue. Further research is warranted to determine how best to apply tactile alerts in control stations to reduce visual and auditory workload.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Calhoun

G.L.

Draper

M.H.

Ruff

H.A.

Fontejon

J. V.

(2002). Utility of a tactile display for cueing faults. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting, 2144–2148.

Craig

J.C.

Sherrick

C.E.

(1982). Dynamic tactile displays. In Schiff

Foulke

Tactual perception: A sourcebook (pp. 210–233. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

Draper

M.H.

Calhoun

G.L.

Ruff

H.A.

Williamson

D.T.

Barry

T.P.

(2003). Manual versus speech input for unmanned aerial vehicle control station operations. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 47th Annual Meeting.

Eimer

Driver

(2000). An event-related brain potential study of cross-modal links in spatial attention between vision and touch. Psychophysiology, 37, 697–705.

Endsley

M.R.

(1988). Design and evaluation for situation awareness enhancement, Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 32nd Annual Meeting, pp. 97–101.

Nikolic

M.I.

Sklar

A.E.

Sarter

N.B.

(1998). Multisensory feedback in support of pilot-automation coordination: The case of uncommanded mode transitions. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 42nd Annual Meeting, 239–243.

Riggs

L.A.

(1971). Vision. In. Kling

J.W.

Riggs

L.A.

Woodworth & Schlosberg's Experimental Psychology (3rd Edition), New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Sklar

A.E.

Sarter

N. B.

(1999). Good vibrations: Tactile feedback in support of attention allocation and human-automation coordination in event-driven domains. Human Factors, 41(4), 543–552.

Van Erp

J.B.F.

(2002). Guidelines for the use of vibrotactile displays in human computer interaction. 2002 EuroHaptics.

10.

Wickens

C.D.

(1992). Engineering Psychology and Human Performance (2nd Edition). New York: Harper Collins.