There is little guidance for designers on how to map information requirements to tactile displays. In this paper, we propose new directions for carrying out the mapping of tactile displays based on semantic mapping techniques used in auditory and visual displays. We discuss these techniques in relation to the design of a multimodal ground control station (GCS) for unmanned aerial vehicles to improve the visually-dominated GCS interface. We hope that this approach will encourage the design of better, safer, and more intuitive UAV GCS interfaces to reduce the frequency of mishaps related to human error.
BrewsterS.A.WrightP.C.EdwardsA.D.N. (1993). An evaluation of earcons for use in auditory human computer interfaces. In INTERCHI 93 - Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 222–227). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: ACM Press.
3.
BrownL.M.BrewsterS.A.PurchaseH.C. (2006). Tactile crescendos and sforzandos: Applying musical techniques to tactile icon design. In Proceedings of CHI 2006 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 610–615). Montréal, QC: ACM Press.
DonmezB.GrahamH.D.CummingsM.L. (2008). Assessing the impact of haptic peripheral displays for UAV operators. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Prepared for Charles River Analytics, Inc. Report number HAL2008–02.
6.
ElmW.GualtieriJ.TittleJ.PotterS.S.McKennaB. (2009). Pragmatic use of cognitive work analysis in system design: Extending current thinking by adapting the mapping principle. In BurnsC.M.BisantzA.M., Applications of cognitive work analysis. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
7.
GaverW.W.SmithR.B.O'sheaT. (1991). Effective sounds in the complex systems: The Arkola simulation. In Proceedings of CHI (pp. 85–90). New Orleans, LA: ACM Press.
8.
GunnD.V.WarmJ.S.NelsonW.T.BoliaR.S.SchumskyD.A.CorcoranK.J. (2005). Target acquisition with UAVs: Vigilance displays and advanced cuing interfaces. Human Factors, 47, 488–497.
9.
HansenJ.P. (1995). Representation of system invariants by optical invariants in configural displays for process control. In HancockP.FlachJ.CairdJ.VicenteK., Local applications of the ecological approach to human-machine systems (Vol. 2, pp. 208–233). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10.
HatfieldJ.MurphyS.JobR.F.S. (2008). Beliefs and behaviours relevant to the road safety effects of profile lane-marking. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 40, 1872–1879.
11.
HingJ.OhP.Y. (2008). Integrating motion platforms with unmanned aerial vehicles to improve control, train pilots and minimize accidents. In Proceedings of the ASME 2008 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference IDETC/CIE 2008. Brooklyn, NY: ACME.
12.
HoG.SiakalukP.D.ScialfaC.T. (2003). Plasticity of feature-based selection in triple-conjunction search. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57, 48–60.
13.
HoC.TanH.Z.SpenceC. (2005). Using spatial vibrotactile cues to direct visual attention in driving scenes. Transportation Research Part F8 (2005) 397–412.
14.
JonesL.A.SarterN.B. (2008). Tactile displays: Guidance for their design and application. Human Factors, 50, 90–111.
15.
KlatzkyR.L.LedermanS.J. (1993). Spatial and nonspatial avenues to object recognition by the human haptic system. In EilanN.McCarthyR.A.BrewerB., Spatial representation: Problems in philosophy and psychology (pp. 191–205). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
LinegangM.P.StonerH.A.PattersonM.J.SeppeltB.D.HoffmanJ.D.CrittendonZ.B.LeeJ.D. (2006). Human-automation collaboration in dynamic mission planning: A challenge requiring an ecological approach. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50th Annual Meeting (pp. 2482–2486). San Francisco, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
18.
McCarleyJ.S.WickensC.D. (2005). Human factors implications of UAVs in the national airspace. Aviation Human Factors Division. Institute of Aviation. Technical Report AHFD-05–05/FAA-05–01. Prepared for Federal Aviation Administration.
19.
PedersonH.K.CookeN.J.PringleH.L.ConnorO. (2006). UAV human factors: Operator perspectives. In CookeN.J.PringleH.L.PedersenH.K.ConnorO.SalasE., Human factors of remotely operated vehicles. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: JAI Press.
20.
RasmussenJ. (1998). Ecological interface design for complex systems: An example: SEAD-UAV systems. United States Air Force Research Laboratory. Report number AFRL-HE-WP-TR-1999–0011.
21.
ReedC.ShohamS.HalgrenE. (2004). Neural substrates of tactile object recognition: An FMRI study. Human Brain Mapping, 21, 236–246.
22.
SandersonP.M.AndersonJ.WatsonM. (2000). Extending ecological interface design to auditory display. In Proceedings of the 2000 Annual Conference of the Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group (CHISIG) (pp. 259–266). Sydney, Australia: Ergonomics Society of Australia (OzCHI2000).
23.
SandersonP.ReisingD.C. (2002). Ecological interface design for pasteurizer II: A process description of semantic mapping. Human Factors, 44, 222–247.
24.
SantangeloV.HoC.SpenceC. (2008). Capturing spatial attention with multisensory cues. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 15, 398–403.
25.
SarterN.B. (2006). Multimodal information presentation: Design guidance and research challenges. Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 36, 439–445.
26.
StreriA.GentazE. (2004). Cross-modal recognition of shape from hand to eyes and handedness in human newborns. Neuropsychologia, 42, 1365–1369.
27.
US Air Force (March 26, 2007). Aircraft accident investigation MQ-1B Predator, Kandahar Airbase, Afghanistan. (Publication No. MQ-1B, S/N 03–3104). Last accessed January 7, 2007 from http://usaf.aib.law.af.mil/MQ-1B_AOR_26Mar07.pdf.
28.
WatsonM.RussellW.J.SandersonP. (2000). Anesthesia monitoring, alarm proliferation, and ecological interface design. Australian Journal of Information Systems, 7, 109–114.
29.
WilliamsK.W. (2004). A summary of unmanned aircraft accident/incident data: Human factors implications. Oklahoma City, OK: Civil Aerospace Medical Institute. Federal Aviation Administration.
30.
WolfeJ.M. (1994). Guided search 2.0. A revised model of visual search. Psychological Bulletin & Review, 1, 202–238.
