The history of human performance modeling (HPM) in the U.S. Army is described, the early influences and technological events that made it possible. Highlights of significant milestones are presented, including HPM efforts that were influential in influencing the U.S. Army's modeling practices and in changing system design. The latest challenges in cognitive modeling, advanced decision making, stressors, and the particular challenges of distributed and linked simulations are discussed as well as the prospect of using methods from neuroscience for validation of cognitive models.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllenderL. (2000). Modeling human performance: Impacting system design, performance, and cost. In ChinniM. (Ed.) Proceedings of the Military, Government and Aerospace Simulation Symposium, 2000 Advanced Simulation Technologies Conference (Washington, D.C.) 139–144.
2.
AllenderL.SalviL.PromiselD. (June 1997) Evaluation of Human Performance under Diverse Conditions via Modeling Technology. In Proceedings of Workshop on Emerging Technologies in Human Engineering Testing and Evaluation, NATO Research Study Group 24, Brussels, Belgium.
3.
AllenderL.KelleyT. D.SalviL.LockettJ.HeadleyD. B.PromiselD.MitchellD.RicherC.FengT. (1995). Verification, validation, and accreditation of a soldier-system modeling tool. Proceedings of The Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 29th Annual Meeting, San Diego, 1219–1223.
4.
AndersonJ.R.LebiereC. (1998). The Atomic Components of ThoughtMahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
5.
AndersonJ.R.QinY.SohnM-H.StengerV.A.CarterC.S.An Information-Processing Model of the BOLD Response in Symbol Manipulation Tasks. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1 June 2003, vol. 10, no. 2, 241–261(21).
6.
ArcherR.LebiereC.WarwickW.SchunkD.BiefeldE. (2003). Integration of task network and cognitive models to support system design. In the Proceedings of the Collaborative Technology Alliances Conference 2003. Army Research Laboratory, Adelphi, MD.
7.
ArcherS.AdkinsR.IMPRINT User's Guide prepared for US Army Research Laboratory, Human Research and Engineering Directorate, April 1999.
8.
ArcherS.AllenderL. (2001). New capabilities in the army's human performance modeling tool. In Proceedings of the Military, Government, and Aerospace Simulation Conference, M. Chinni (Ed.), Seattle, WA, 22–27.
9.
DahlS.G.AllenderLKelleyT.AdkinsR. (1995). Transitioning software to the Windows environment — Challenges and innovations. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 29th Annual Meeting-1995, San Diego, 1224–1227.
10.
GluckK.AllardT.AllenderL.ChipmanS.GlinertE.TangneyJ.WarrenR. (2001). Panel on Government Interests and Opportunities in Cognitive Modeling. In Proceedings of the 2001 Fourth International Conference on Cognitive Modeling, Fairfax, VA, p.33.
11.
HoaglandD.G.MartinE.A.AnesgartM.BrettB.E.LaVineN.D.ArcherS. (2000). Representing goaloriented human performance in constructive simulations: validation of a model performing complex time-criticaltarget missions, in Proceedings of the SIW Conference.
JuarezO.GonzalezC. (2004). Situation awareness of commanders: A cognitive model. In Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation (BRIMS).
14.
KellihanB.WashingtonR. (2004) C3HPM: An application of IMPRINT within the MATREX. In Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation (BRIMS).
15.
KelleyT. D.PattonD. J.AllenderL. (2001). Predicting situation awareness errors using cognitive modeling. In: SmithM.J.SalvendyG.HarrisD.KoubekR.J.. (Eds.) Proceedings of Human-Computer Interaction International 2001 Conference: (Vol. 1) Usability Evaluation and Interface Design: Cognitive Engineering, Intelligent Agents and Virtual Reality. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ, 1455–1459.
16.
KelleyT. D.AllenderL. (1996). Why choose?A process approach to usability testing. Symbiosis of Human and Artifact: Human and Social Aspects of Human Computer Interaction, Elsevier Press.
17.
LebiereC.BiefeldE.ArcherR.ArcherS.AllenderL.KelleyT.D. (2002). IMPRINT/ACT-R: Integration of a Task Network Modeling Architecture with a Cognitive Architecture and its Application to Human Error Modeling. In ChinniM. (ed.) Proceedings of the Military, Government and Aerospace Simulation Symposium, 2002 Advanced Simulation Technologies Conference (San Diego).
18.
McMahonR.SpencerM.ThorntonA.1995. A quick response approach to assessing the operational performance of the XM983E1 NBCRS through the use of modeling and validation testing. In International Test and Evaluation Association Proceedings. (Huntsville, AL), 115–119.
19.
MitchellD. K. (2000). Mental Workload and ARL Workload Modeling Tools. ARL-TN-161. Army Research Laboratory: Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD.
20.
PewR.W.MavorA.S., (Eds.) (1998). Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C.
PlottB.QuesadaS.KilduffP.SwobodaJ.AllenderL. (2004). Using an information-driven decision making human performance tool to assess u.s. army command, control, and communication issues. In the Proceedings of the 2004 Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting, New Orleans, LA, 2396–2400.
23.
WarwickW. (2004) Initial comparisons between a “Naturalistic” model of decision making and human performance data. In Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Behavior Representation in Modeling and Simulation (BRIMS).
