Comparison of Collaborative Display Technologies for Team Design Review

Abstract

A comparative evaluation of collaborative display technologies was conducted to explore their ability to support a pair of participants conducting a collaborative workspace design review. Five review media were compared: 2D CAD model on CRT, 3D CAD model on CRT, 3D CAD model on a Curved plasma display, a large DataWall display, and a CAVE environment. Participants reviewed a model depicting an in-vehicle navigation system installed within the front dash of a vehicle and detected design flaws. Performance measures (number of detected flaws and detection time) and usability measures (display, design review, and collaborative quality) were collected. The main findings were: a) flaw detection was better for 3D displays than the 2D display; b) flaws detection was progressively reduced with more immersive 3D displays; c) speed-accuracy tradeoffs were observed such that detection time was less for the 2D than the 3D displays, and decreased with the degree of immersion; d) using the standard CRT is more cost-effective than using the Curved, DataWall, or CAVE displays.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Beevis

Vallerand

Greenley

(2001). Technologies for Workload and Crewing Reduction (DCIEM TR 2001-109). Toronto, Canada: Defence and Civil Institute of Environmental Medicine.

Bolstad

C.A.

Endsley

M. R.

(1999) The Effects of Task Load and Shared Displays on Team Situation Awareness. Marietta, GA: Air Force Research Laboratory.

Commission of the European Communities (2000). Commission recommendation on safe and efficient invehicle information and communication systems: A European statement of principles on human machine interface. Brussels, Belgium: European Union.

Dynott

Lemoine

Piechulla

Stefani

Wakula

Williams

(2002). Project Report: Virtual Reality Systems for perceived ergonomic quality testing of driving task and design. Traffic Research Group, Universität Regensburg. Commission of the European.

Green

Levison

Paelke

Serafin

(1994). Suggested human factors design guidelines for driver information systems. Technical Report UMTRI-93-21. The University of Michigan, Transportation Research Institute.

Gwynne

J.W.

Feher

B. A.

Obermayer

R. W.

Smillie

R. J.

Linville

J. M.

Heacox

N. J.

(1996). Evaluating Collaborative Technologies for Command and Control Teams. San Diego, CA: Office of Naval Research.

van Orden

Hoeksema C.Y.

(1998). Effects of Computer Support on Communication and Decision Making: A Review of the Literature (Effecten van Computer-Ondersteuning op Communicatie en Besluitvorming: Een Literatuurstudie). Soesterberg, Netherlands: TNO Human Factors Research Institute.

Japan Automobile Manufactures Association (2000). Guideline for In-Vehicle Display Systems. Version 2.1.

Kline

T. J. B.

McGrath

(1999). A Review of the groupware literature: Theories, methodologies, and a research agenda. Canadian Psychology, 40, 265–271.

10.

Owen

(1999). HyperVIS: Teaching Scientific Visualisation Using Hypermedia. Report to the Project of the ACM SIGGRAPH Education Committee, the National Science Foundation, and the Hypermedia and Visualization Laboratory, Georgia State University.

11.

Wickens

C. D.

Hollands

J. G.

(2000). Engineering Psychology and Human Performance (3rd ed.). Upper Sadde River, NJ: Prentice Hall.