Objective: To determine how scores on standard spatial measures correlate with the ability to operate a robot under different teleoperation conditions. Background: Past work has demonstrated that there is a relationship between visual spatial ability and teleoperation performance. Method: In this experiment participants completed a spatial visualization (VZ-2) and spatial relation (S-2) measure, and teleoperated a robot through both low and high difficulty courses under direct line of sight (DLS) and teleoperation (TO) conditions. Performance was determined by course completion time and the total number of collisions made during navigation. Results and Conclusion: Aggregate visual spatial ability was inversely correlated with operator performance under each of the experimental conditions. Analyzed independently, only spatial relations ability correlated with TO performance, while both measures correlated with DLS operation. Application: Better understanding of the relationship between spatial abilities and teleoperation performance can assist in the selection and training of future operators, as well as the design of superior interfaces.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BowenS. A. (1996). The effects of spatial ability on performance with ecological interfaces: Mental models and knowledge-based behaviors. Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(6), 3204 (UMI No. AAT 3134674).
2.
CarrollJ. B. (1993). Human cognitive abilities: A survey of factor-analytic studies. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
3.
ChenJ. Y. C.DurlachP. J.SloanJ. A.BowensL. D. (2008). Humanrobot interaction on the context of simulated route reconnaissance missions. Military Psychology, 20, 135–149.
4.
ChenJ. Y. C.TerrenceP. I. (2008). Effects of tactile cueing on concurrent performance of military and robotics tasks in a simulated multitasking environment. Ergonomics, 51(8), 1137–1152.
5.
DeJongB.PColgateJ.E.PeshkinM. A. (2004). Improving teleoperation: Reducing mental rotations and translations. Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE International Conference on Robotics & Automation, 3708–3714.
6.
EkstromR. B.FrenchJ. W.HarmanH. H.DermenD. (1976). Manual for kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Letter Sets. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
7.
HartS. G.StavelandL. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In HancockP. A.MeshkatiN (eds), Human mental workload (pp. 139$D183). Amsterdam: North Holland.
8.
JaeggiS. M.BuschkuehlM.JonidesJ.PerrigW. J. (2008). Improving fluid intelligence with training on working memory. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 105(19), 6829–33.
9.
KassS. J.AhlersR. H.DuggerM. (1998). Eliminating gender differences through practice in an applied visual spatial task. Human Performance, 11(4), 337–349.
10.
KrotkovE.BlitchJ. (1999). The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Tactical Mobile Robotics Program. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 18, 769–776.
11.
LathanC. E.TraceyM. (2002). The effects of operator spatial perception and sensory feedback on human-robot teleoperation performance. Presence, 11(4), 368–377.
12.
MoffatS. D.HampsonE.HatzipantelisM. (1998). Navigation in a “virtual” maze: Sex differences and correlation with psychometric measures of spatial ability in humans. Evolution and Human Behavior, 19, 73–87.
13.
MurphyR. (2004). Trial by Fire: Activities of the Rescue Robots at the World Trade Center from 11–21 September 2001. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, September 2004, 50–60.
14.
PakR.RogersW. A.FiskA. D. (2006). Spatial ability subfactors and their influences on a computer-based information search task. Human Factors, 48(1), 154–165.
15.
Reinhardt-RutlandA.H. (1996). Remote operation: A selective review of research into visual depth perception. The Journal of General Psychology, 123, 237–248.
16.
SekmenA. S.WilkesM.GoldmanS. R.Zein-SabattoS.Z. (2002). Exploring importance of location and prior knowledge of environment on mobile robot control. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 5–20.
17.
SheridanT. B. (1992). Telerobotics, Automation and Human Supervisory Control. Cambridge, M.A: MIT Press.
18.
WoodsD. D.TittleJ.FeilMRoeslerA. (2004). Envisioning human-robot coordination in future operations. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part C: Applications and Reviews, 34(2), 210–218.
