Dynamic operational tasks, such as airspace monitoring and civil emergency operations, require maintaining awareness of changing situations, in part by detecting and interpreting significant changes. Poor change detection ability makes this maintenance difficult enough while monitoring a situation display uninterrupted, but multitasking and interruptions increase the difficulty because the situation can change during the interruptions. Yet little research has addressed the need for better interface tools to help users detect and interpret changes, either to maintain situation awareness or to recover it following interruptions. The objective of this article is to present a principled, theoretical basis for designing interface tools that help users recover and maintain situation awareness in dynamic operational tasks. First, we present a framework for understanding the processes of interruption recovery during dynamic tasks within the broader context of interruption recovery generally. Then we briefly review a series of experiments, primarily from our own laboratory, from which we derive four design principles. Last, we contrast a number of interface designs in terms of the principles. Consideration of the four principles should facilitate the design of more effective tools to help users get back up to speed for these important and high-risk tasks.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AltmannE. M.TraftonJ. G. (2007). Timecourse of recovery from task interruption: Data and a model. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 14, 1079–1084.
2.
BallardD.HayhoeM.PookP.RaoR. (1998). Deictic codes for the embodiment of cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 723–767.
3.
BootW. R.KramerA. F.BecicE.WiegmannD. A.KuboseT. (2006). Detecting transient changes in dynamic displays: The more you look, the less you see. Human Factors, 48, 759–773.
4.
CadizJ. J.VenoliaG.JanckeG.GuptaA.2002. Designing and deploying an information awareness interface. Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 314–323). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
5.
ChristoffersenK.WoodsD. D.BlikeG. T. (2001). Extracting event patterns from telemetry data. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 45th Annual Meeting (pp. 409–413). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
6.
CummingsM. L. (2004). The need for command and control instant message adaptive interfaces: Lessons learned from Tactical Tomahawk human-in-the-loop simulations. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 7, 653–661.
7.
DabbishL.KrautR. (2004). Controlling interruptions: Awareness displays and social motivation for coordination. Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 182–191). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
8.
DiVitaJ.ObermayerR.NugentW.LinvilleJ. M. (2004). Verification of the change blindness phenomenon while managing critical events on a combat information display. Human Factors, 46, 205–218.
9.
EndsleyM. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37, 32–64.
10.
EndsleyM. R.BoltéB.JonesD. G. (2003). Designing for situation awareness: An approach to user-centered design. London: Taylor & Francis.
11.
HeacoxN. J.MooreR. A.MorrisonJ. G.YturraldeR. F. (2004). Real-time online communications: “Chat” use in navy operations. Proceedings of the 2004 Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium. Washington, DC: Department of Defense, Command and Control Research Program.
12.
HFES 200 Committee. (2006). Human factors engineering of software user interfaces (HFES 200). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
13.
HoC.-Y.NikolicM. I.WatersM. J.SarterN. B. (2004). Not now Supporting interruption management by indicating the modality and urgency of pending tasks. Human Factors, 46, 399–409.
14.
IqbalS. T.BaileyB. P. (2006). Leveraging characteristics of task structure to predict the cost of interruption. Proceedings of the CHI ′06 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 741–750). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
15.
KeelP.(in press). EWALL: A computational tool for knowledge building. In LetskyM. P.WarnerN.FioreS.SmithC. A. P. (Eds.), Macrocognition in teams. Hampshire, UK: Ashgate.
16.
LeeJ. D.SeeK. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46, 50–80.
17.
LevinD. T.MomenN.DrivdahlS. B.SimonsD. J. (2000). The metacognitive error of overestimating change-detection ability. Visual Cognition, 7, 397–412.
18.
LiebhaberM. J.FeherB. (2000). Air threat assessment: Research, model, and display guidelines. Proceedings of the 2000 Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium. Washington, DC: Department of Defense, Command and Control Research Program.
19.
MackA.RockI. (1998). Inattention blindness. Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
20.
MarrD. (1982). Vision. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
21.
MatthewsT.RattenburyT.CarterS. (2007). Defining, designing, and evaluating peripheral displays: An analysis using activity theory. Human-Computer Interaction, 22, 221–261.
22.
McCrickardD. S.ChewarC. M. (2003). Attuning notification design to user goals and attention costs. Communications of the ACM, 46, 67–72.
23.
McCrickardD. S.ChewarC. M.SomervellJ. P.NdiwalanaA. (2003). A model for notification systems evaluation: Assessing user goals for multitasking activity. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 10, 312–338.
24.
McFarlaneD. C. (2002). Comparison of four primary methods for coordinating the interruption of people in human-computer interaction. Human-Computer Interaction, 17, 63–139.
25.
McGuirlJ. M.SarterN. B. (2006). Supporting trust calibration and the effective use of decision aids by presenting dynamic system confidence information. Human Factors, 48, 656–665.
26.
MonkC. A.Boehm-DavisD. A.TraftonJ. G. (2004). Recovering from interruptions: Implications for driver distraction research. Human Factors, 46, 650–663.
27.
MonsellS. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 134–140.
28.
ObermayerR. W.NugentW. A. (2000). Human-computer interaction for alert warning and attention allocation systems of the multi-modal watchstation. In HamburgerP. (Ed.), Integrated command environments: Proceedings of SPIE (Vol. 4126, pp. 14–22). Bellingham, WA: SPIE—The International Society for Optical Engineering.
29.
ParasuramanR.RileyV. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors, 39, 230–253.
30.
PattersonE. S.Watts-PerottiJ.WoodsD. D. (1999). Voice loops as coordination aids in space shuttle mission control. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8, 353–371.
31.
RensinkR. A. (2002). Change detection. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 245–277.
32.
RoscoeS. N. (1968). Airborne displays for flight and navigation. Human Factors, 10, 321–332.
33.
RosenholtzR.LiY.MansfieldJ.JinZ.2005. Feature congestion: A measure of display clutter. Proceedings of the CHI ′05 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 761–770). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
34.
SklarA. E.SarterN. B. (1999). Good vibrations: Tactile feedback in support of attention allocation and human-automation coordination in event-driven domains. Human Factors, 41, 543–552.
35.
SmallmanH. S.JohnM. (2003). CHEX (Change History EXplicit): New HCI concepts for change awareness. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting (pp. 528–532). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
36.
SmallmanH. S.JohnM. (2005). Naive realism: Misplaced faith in the utility of realistic displays. Ergonomics in Design, 13(3), 6–13.
37.
SorkinR. D.KantowitzB. H.KantowitzS. C. (1988). Likelihood alarm displays. Human Factors, 30, 445–459.
38.
JohnM.(in press). Designing a better shared whiteboard. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 52nd Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
39.
JohnM.SmallmanH. S.ManesD. I. (2005). Recovery from interruptions to a dynamic monitoring task: The beguiling utility of instant replay. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 49th Annual Meeting (pp. 473–477). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
40.
JohnM.SmallmanH. S.ManesD. I. (2007). Interruption recovery tools for team collaboration. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 51st Annual Meeting (pp. 1317–1321). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
41.
JohnM.SmallmanH. S.ManesD. I.FeherB. A.MorrisonJ. G. (2005). Heuristic automation for decluttering tactical displays. Human Factors, 47, 509–525.
42.
TraftonJ. G.AltmannE. M.BrockD. P. (2005). Huh? What was I doing? How people use environmental cues after an interruption. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 49th Annual Meeting (pp. 468–472). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
43.
TraftonJ. G.AltmannE. M.BrockD. P.MintzF. E. (2003). Preparing to resume an interrupted task: Effects of prospective goal encoding and retrospective rehearsal. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 583–603.
44.
VarakinD.LevinD. T.FidlerR. (2004). Unseen and unaware: Implications of recent research on failures of visual awareness for human-computer interface design. Human-Computer Interaction, 19, 389–422.
45.
WatsonM.SandersonP. (2004). Sonification supports eyes-free respiratory monitoring and task time-sharing. Human Factors, 46, 497–517.
46.
WickensC. D. (2000). Imperfect and unreliable automation and its implications for attention allocation, information access and situation awareness (Tech. Rep. ARL-00-10/NASA-00-2). Champaign-Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Aviation Research Lab.
47.
WickensC. D.CarswellC. M. (1995). The proximity compatibility principle: Its psychological foundations and its relevance to display design. Human Factors, 37, 473–494.
48.
WickensC. D.HollandsJ. (2000). Engineering psychology and human performance (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
49.
WolfeJ. M. (1998). Visual search. In PashlerH. (Ed.), Attention (pp. 13–73). London: University College London Press.
50.
YehM.MerloJ. L.WickensC. D.BrandenburgD. L. (2003). Head up versus head down: The costs of imprecision, unreliability, and visual clutter on cue effectiveness for display signaling. Human Factors, 45, 390–407.
51.
YehM.WickensC. D. (2001). Attentional filtering in the design of electronic map displays: A comparison of color coding, intensity coding, and decluttering techniques. Human Factors, 43, 543–562.
