Recovery from interruptions to a dynamic monitoring task: The beguiling utility of instant replay

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

Volumn , Issue , 2005, Pages 473-477

  John, Mark St ^a   Smallman, Harvey S ^a   Manes, Daniel I ^a  

^a Pacific Science and Engineering Group   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SYSTEMS; PROBLEM SOLVING; SENSORY PERCEPTION;

INTERACTIVE TABLES; SITUATION AWARENESS;

HUMAN ENGINEERING;

EID: 44349155390     PISSN: 10711813     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1177/154193120504900355     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (19)

1. Altmann, E. M. & Trafton, J. G. (2002). Memory for goals: an activation-based model. Cognitive Science, 26, 39-83.
2. Baddeley, A. D. (1972). Selective attention and performance in dangerous environments. British Journal of Psychology, 63, 537-546.
3. Department of Defense (1999). Department of defense, interface standard, common warfighting symbology: MIL-STD-2525B. Washington DC: Department of Defense, Defense Information Systems Agency. Available at http://symbology.disa.mil/symbol/index.html.
4. DiVita, J. Obermayer, R. Nugent, W., & Linville, J. M. (2004). Verification of the change blindness phenomenon while managing critical events on a combat information display. Human Factors, 46, 205-218.
5. Hutehins, E., Hollan. J., & Norman, D. (1986). Direct Manipulation Interfaces. In D. Norman and S. Draper, (Eds.), User Centered System Design. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, pp. 87-124.
6. Levin, D.T., Momen, N., Drivdahl, S.B., & Simons, D.J. (2000) The metacognitive error of overestimating change-detection ability. Visual Cognition, 7, 397-412.
7. McFarlane, D. C. (2002). Comparison of four primary methods for coordinating the interruption of people in human-computer interaction. Human-Computer Interaction, 17, 63-139.
8. th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica, CA: HFES.
9. Monsell, S. (2003). Task switching. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 134-140.
10. NASA (no date). Task Load Index [TLX] Version 1.0, Users' Manual. Available at http://iac.dtic.mil/hsiac/Products.htm#TLX
11. Rensink, R. A. (2002). Change detection. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 245-277.
12. Roscoe, S. N. (1968). Airborne displays for flight and navigation. Human Factors, 10, 321-332.
13. th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp. 528-532). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
14. Smallman, H. S. & St. John, M. (2005). Naïve Realism: Misplaced faith in the utility of realistic displays. Ergonomics in Design, in press.
15. St. John, M., Smallman, H. S., Manes, D. I., Feher, B. A., & Morrison, J. G. (2005). Heuristic automation for decluttering tactical displays. Human Factors. In press.
16. Trafton, J. G., Altmann, E. M., Brock, D. P., & Mintz, F. 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.
17. Varakin, D. A., Levin, D. T., & Fidler, R. (2004). Unseen and unaware: Implications of recent research on failures of visual awareness for human-computer interface design. Human-Computer Interaction, 19, 389-422.
18. Wickens, C. D., & Carswell, C. M. (1995). The proximity compatibility principle: its psychological foundation and relevance to display design. Human Factors, 37, 473-494.
19. Williams, L. J. (1995). Peripheral target recognition and visual field narrowing in aviators and nonaviators. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 5, 215-232.