Small batch manufacturing typical of modern production systems requires improved visual inspection of novel products for many defect types. Because each item inspected is different, inspectors cannot develop product-specific techniques to speed performance using traditional direct viewing. We performed two experiments to evaluate the use of binocular rivalry as an alternative to direct viewing in stereo viewing of product pairs. Both free stereo viewing (i.e., with no optical aids) and viewing with a stereoscope led to large increases in performance of searching for targets in extended symbol arrays. For increased target set size there was an expected increase in inspection time for direct viewing but no corresponding increase for stereo viewing. Binocular rivalry appears to be a promising, though difficult, tool for facilitating visual inspection, as it both improves performance and appears to allow parallel processing of targets.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aks, D. J., & Errs, J. T. (1992). Visual search for direction of shading is influenced by apparent depth. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 63–74.
2.
Blake, R. (1989). A neural theory of binocular rivalry. Physiological Review, 96, 145–167.
3.
Chase, W. G. (1986). Visual information processing. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds), Handbook of perception and human performance: Vol. II. Cognitive processes and performance (pp. 28-1–28-71). New York: Wiley.
4.
Cheal, M. & Lyon, D. R. (1992). Attention in visual search: Multiple search classes. Perception & Psychophysics, 52, 113–138.
5.
Chi, C.-F., & Drury, C. G. (1995). A test of economic models of stopping policy in visual search. HE Transactions, 27, 392–393.
6.
Czaja, S. J., & Drury, C. G. (1981). Training programs for inspection. Human Factors, 23, 473–484.
7.
Drury, C. G. (1990). Visual search in industrial inspection. In D. Brogan (Ed.), Visual search (pp. 263–276). London: Taylor & Francis.
8.
Drury, C. G. (1992). Product design for inspectability: A systematic procedure. In M. Helander & M. Nagamachi (Eds.), Design for manufacturability: A systems approach to concurrent engineering and ergonomics (pp. 204–216). London: Taylor & Francis.
9.
Drury, C. C., & Goonetilleke, R. S. (1992). Stress, performance and level of automation. In E. Megaw (Ed.), Contemporary ergonomics 1992 (pp. 131–137). London: Taylor & Francis.
10.
Drury, C. G., & Prabhu, P. V. (1994). Human factors in test and inspection. In G. Salvendy & W. Karwowski (Eds.), Design of work and development of personnel in advanced manufacturing (pp. 355–402). New York: Wiley.
11.
Fisk, A. D., & Eboch, M. M. (1987). Applications of automatic/control processing theory to complex tasks: An encouraging look. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting (pp. 674–678). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
12.
Gallwey, T. J., & Drury, C. G. (1986). Task complexity in visual inspection. Human Factors, 28, 595–606.
13.
Helander, M. G. (1997). Cognitive and sociotechnical issues in design for manufacturability. International Journal of Human Factors in Manufacturing, 4, 375–390.
14.
Hou, T.-S., Lin, L. & Drury, C. G. (1993). An empirical study of hybrid inspection systems and allocation of inspection function. International Journal of Human Factors in Manufacturing, 3, 351–367.
15.
Julesz, B. (1971). Foundations of cyclopean perception. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
16.
Kidd, P. T., & Karwowski, W. (Eds.). (1994). Advances in agile manufacturing. Washington, DC: IOS Press.
17.
Liu, Y. (1996). Interactions between memory scanning and visual scanning in display monitoring. Ergonomics, 39, 1038–1053.
18.
Liuzzo, J. & Drury, C. G. (1978). An evaluation of blink inspection. Human Factors, 11, 201–210.
19.
Morawski, T. B., Drury, C. G., & Karwan, M. (1992). The optimum speed of visual inspection using a random search strategy. HE Transactions, 24, 122–133.
20.
Neisser, U. (1963). Decision time without reaction time. American Journal of Psychology, 76, 376–385.
21.
Rogers, W. A., Lee, M. D., & Fisk, A. D. (1995). Contextual effects on general learning, feature learning, and attention strengthening in visual search. Human Factors, 37, 158–172.
22.
Schneider, W. & Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Detection, search and attention. Psychological Review84, 1–66.
23.
Smith, H. T. U. (1943). Aerial photographs and their applications. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
24.
Sternberg, S. (1967). Scanning a persisting visual image versus a memorized list. Paper presented at the meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, Boston, MA.
25.
“Thing, N. E.” (1993). Magic eye. Kansas City, MO: Andrews and McMeel.
26.
Treisman, A. (1962). Binocular rivalry and stereoscopic depth perception. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 14, 23–37.
27.
Treisman, A. (1986). Features and objects in visual processing, Scientific American, 255(5), 114B–125.
28.
Treisman, A. & Gormican, T. (1988). Feature analysis in early vision: Evidence from search asymmetries. Psychological Review, 95, 15–48.
29.
Wang, M. J., & Drury, C. G. (1989). A method of evaluating inspector's performance differences and job requirementsApplied Ergonomics, 2, 181–190.
30.
Whistance, R. S., Adams, L. P., vanGeems, B. A., & Bridger, R. S. (1995). Postural adaptations to workbench modifications in standing workers. Ergonomics, 38, 2485–2503.
31.
Wickens, C. D. (1992). Engineering psychology and human performance. New York: HarperCollins.
32.
Wolfe, J. M. (1986). Stereopsis and binocular rivalry thresholds. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 93, 269–282.
33.
Wolfe, J. M. (1988). Binocularity and visual search. Perception & Psychophysics, 44, 81–93.
