The Impact of Alternating between Integral and Separable Displays in a Multidimensional Decision-Making Task

Abstract

Research into the format of visual displays of multidimensional data has revealed relative superiority of certain formats in relation to the nature of task demands such as fault diagnosis versus fault detection. Previous research also suggests that order of training or experience in working with alternate display formats might also influence the ability of operators to gain the full benefits of these display formats. This last factor comes into play during the redesign of existing displays and the design of multiple display environments in domains such as nuclear process control, tactical and commercial flight, and anesthesia monitoring.

The experiment described in this paper sought to further examine and clarify the types of performance decrements that can emerge after switching visual display formats used to support a complex decision-making task (Purcell and Coury, 1988). Accuracy and response time performance demonstrated that transfer of training was asymmetric after the switch. These results indicate that the order in which operators learn to use a given format of visually displayed data can enhance or hinder their subsequent use of alternate display formats. Redesign efforts and/or the use of multiple display formats in complex decision-making settings must address these effects.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Boulette

M.D.

(1989). “The Effect of Display Format and Classification Strategy on a Diagnostic Decision Task.” Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society. Santa Monica, CA: Human.

Card

S.K.

Moran

T.P.

Newell

(1983). The Psychology of Human-Computer Interaction. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.

Coury

B.G.

Boulette

M.D.

Smith

R.A.

(1989). “The Effects of Uncertainty and Diagnosticity on Classification of Multidimensional Data with Integral and Separable Displays of System Status.” Human Factors, Vol. 31, No. 5, 551–569.

Frey

P.R.

Sides

W.H.

Jr. (1984). Computer-generated Display System Guidelines: Volume 1: Display Design. (EPRI Report No. NP-3701). Palo Alto, CA: Electric Power Research Institute.

Holland

J.H.

Holyoak

K.J.

Nisbett

R.E.

Thagard

P.R.

(1986). Induction: Processes of Inference, Learning, and Discovery. Cambridge, MA: The M.I.T. Press.

Norman

D.A.

(1986). “Cognitive Engineering,” in User Centered System Design. Norman

D.A.

Draper

S. W.

, eds. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Purcell

J.A.

Coury

B.G.

(1988). “Asymmetric Transfer of Training Between Integral and Separable Displays,” Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Human Factors Society. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors.

Rasmussen

(1986). Information Processing and Human-Machine Interaction. New York: North-Holland.

Sanderson

P.M.

Flach

J.M.

Buttigieg

M.A.

Casey

E.J.

(1989). “Object Displays Do Not Always Support Better Integrated Task Performance,” Human Factors, Vol. 31, No. 2, 183–198.

10.

Wickens

C.D.

, (1986). The Object Display: Principles and a Review of Experimental Findings. (Technical Report No. CPL 86–6.) Urbana-Champaign, IL: Cognitive Psychophysiology Laboratory.