Evaluation of Alternative Waveforms for Animated Mimic Displays

Abstract

Animated mimic displays can be used to present system information regarding physical form, function, and causality. However, a potential limitation in current designs has been identified: the presence of ambiguous apparent motion. Two theoretical explanations of ambiguous apparent motion are discussed (Fourier and correspondence hypotheses). Two alternative designs (stair-step and approximate sinusoid luminance waveforms) were evaluated. The velocity matches obtained in Experiment 1 indicate that the sinusoidal waveform produced significantly better performance for both accuracy and latency than the stair-step waveform. The velocity estimates obtained in Experiment 2 indicate that ambiguous apparent motion was not visible with the sinusoidal waveform, but was with the stair-step waveform. One of the two hypotheses (correspondence) provides a reasonable fit with the obtained velocity estimates. A fundamental goal in the design of animated mimic displays is to provide unambiguous mappings between perceived velocity and actual flow rates. Critical factors in design (e.g., waveform, chromatic/luminance contrast, spatial/temporal frequency) are discussed. Actual or potential applications of this research include the design of more effective animated mimic displays.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anstis, S. M. (1986). Motion perception in the frontal plane. In K. Boff , L. Kaufmann , & J. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (Chapter 16, pp. 11–27). New York: Wiley.

Barnett, V. , & Lewis, T. (1984). Outliers in statistical data Chichester, England: Wiley.

Bennett, K. B. (1993). Encoding apparent motion in animated mimic displays. Human Factors, 35, 673–691.

Bennett, K. B. , & Madigan, E. (1994). Contours and borders in animated mimic displays. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 6, 47–64.

Bennett, K. B. , & Nagy, A. L. (1996). Spatial and temporal considerations in animated mimic displays. Displays, 17, 1–14.

Bennett, K. B. , Nagy, A. L. , & Flach, J. M. (1997). Visual displays. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors and ergonomics (2nd ed., pp. 659–696). New York: Wiley.

Campbell, F. W. , & Robson, J. G. (1968). Application of Fourier analysis to the visibility of gratings. Journal of Physiology, 197, 551–566.

Engen, T. (1972). Psychophysics: II. Scaling methods. In J. W. Kling & L. A. Riggs (Eds.), Woodworth and Schlosberg's experimental psychology: Volume 1. Sensation and perception (3rd ed., pp. 47–86). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.

Gescheider, G. A. , & Hughson, B. A. (1991). Stimulus context and absolute magnitude estimation: A study of individual differences. Perception and Psychophysics, 50, 45–57.

10.

Hawkins, J. S. , Reising, J. M. , & Gilmore, J. D. (1983a). Information interpretation through pictorial format. In Proceedings of the 2nd Aerospace Behavioral Engineering Technology Conference (pp. 243–248). Warrendale, PA: Society of Automotive Engineers.

11.

Hawkins, J. S. , Reising, J. M. , & Gilmore, J. D. (1983b). Pictorial format display evaluation. In Proceedings of the National Aerospace and Electronics Conference (NAECON) 1983 (pp. 1132–1138). New York: IEEE.

12.

Hollan, J. D. , Hutchins, E. L. , McCandless, T. P. , Rosenstein, M. , & Weitzman, L. (1987). Graphical interfaces for simulation. In W. B. Rouse (Ed.), Advances in man-machine systems research (Vol. 3, pp. 129–163). Greenwich, CT: JAI.

13.

Hollan, J. D. , Hutchins, E. L. , & Weitzman, L. (1984, Summer). STEAMER: An interactive inspectable simulation-based training system. AI Magazine, 5(2), 15–27.

14.

Kelly, D. H. (1972). Flicker. In H. Autrum , R. Jung , W. R. Loewenstein , D. M. MacKay , & H. L. Teuber (Series Eds.) & D. Jameson & L. M. Hurvich (Vol. Eds.), The handbook of sensory physiology: Vol. 7. Visual psychophysics, (pp. 273–302). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

15.

Kelly, D. H. (1979). Motion and vision: II. Stabilized spatiotemporal threshold surface. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 69, 1340–1349.

16.

Lovie, P. (1986). Identifying outliers. In A. D. Lovie (Ed.), New developments in statistics for psychology and the social sciences (pp. 44–69. London: British Psychological Society/Methuen.

17.

Mulligan, J. B. , & Stone, L. S. (1989). Halftoning method for the generation of motion stimuli. Journal of the Optical Society of America A, 6, 1217–1227.

18.

Rasmussen, J. (1986). Information processing and human-machine interaction: An approach to cognitive engineering New York: Elsevier.

19.

Rasmussen, J. , Pejtersen, A. M. , & Goodstein, L. P. (1994). Cognitive systems engineering New York: Wiley.

20.

Ratcliff, R. (1993). Methods for dealing with reaction time outliers. Psychological Bulletin, 114, 510–532.

21.

Sachs, M. B. , Nachmias, J. , & Robson, J. G. (1971). Spatial frequency channels in human vision. Journal of the Optical Society of America, 61, 1176–1186.

22.

Shoup, R. G. (1979). Color table animation. Computer Graphics, 13(2), 8–13.

23.

Stevens, S. S. (1956). The direct estimation of sensory magnitudes-loudness. American Journal of Psychology, 69, 1–25.

24.

Stevens, S. S. (1958). Problems and methods of psychophysics. Psychological Bulletin, 55, 177–196.

25.

Stevens, S. S. (1975). Psychophysics: Introduction to its perceptual, neural and social prospects New York: Wiley.

26.

Ullman, S. (1979). The interpretation of visual motion Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.