Verification of the change blindness phenomenon while managing critical events on a combat information display

Human Factors

Volumn 46, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 205-218

  DiVita, Joseph ^a   Obermayer, Richard ^b   Nugent, William ^a   Linville, James M ^b  

^a Naval Command   (United States)

^b Pacific Science and Engineering Group Inc   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER WORKSTATIONS; CONTROL SYSTEMS; DISPLAY DEVICES; OBJECT RECOGNITION; RANDOM PROCESSES; RESEARCH; VISION;

CRISIS RESPONSE CENTER; INFORMATION DISPLAY; NUCLEAR POWER INDUSTRY; TACTICAL SITUATION DISPLAYS;

HUMAN ENGINEERING;

ARTICLE; BLINDNESS; CHEMICAL INDUSTRY; HUMAN; INFORMATION; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; MILITARY PHENOMENA; SOLDIER; TASK PERFORMANCE; VISION; VOICE; WORKING MEMORY; ATTENTION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; PSYCHOLOGY; UNITED STATES;

ATTENTION; DATA DISPLAY; HUMANS; PSYCHOLOGY, MILITARY; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; UNITED STATES;

EID: 4644239040     PISSN: 00187208     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1518/hfes.46.2.205.37340     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Ballard, D. H. (1996). On the function of visual representation. In K. A. Atkins (Ed.), Problems in perception: Vancouver studies in cognitive science (pp. 15-33). New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Ballard, D. H., Hayhoe, M. M., & Pelz, J. B. (1995). Memory representations in natural tasks. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 7, 66-80.
3. Ballard, D. H., Hayhoe, M. M., Pook, P. K., & Rao, R. P. N. (1997). Deictic codes for the embodiment of cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 723-767.
4. Becker, M., Pashler, H., & Anstis, S. (1999). Do people see more than change blindness suggests? [Abstract]. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 40(4), S49.
5. Brawn, P. T., Snowden, R. I., & Wolfe, J. M. (1999). The minimal conditions for change blindness: What is hides what was [Abstract]. Investigative Ophthalmology and Visual Science, 40(4), S49.
6. Department of Defense. (1999, January 30). Department of Defense interface standard, common warfighting symbology (MIL-STD-2525B). Reston, VA: Defense Information Systems Agency, Center for Standards. Retrieved May 14, 2004, from http://symbology.disa.mil/symbol/mil-std.html
7. DiVita, J. C., & Nugent, W. A. (2000). Managing critical events in a multimodal watchstation. In Proceedings of the XIVth Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association and 44th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (Vol. 6, pp. 469-472). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
8. Duncan, J. (1984). Selective attention and the organization of visual information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 501-517.
9. Egeth, H. E., & Yantis, S. (1997) Visual attention: Control, representation, and time course. Annual Review of Psychology, 48, 269-297.
10. Foushee, H. C., & Helmreich, R. L. (1988). Group interaction and flight crew performance. In E. L. Weiner & D. C. Nagel (Eds.), Human factors in aviation (pp. 189-227). San Diego, CA: Academic.
11. Hayhoe, M. M., Bensinger, D. G., & Ballard, D. H. (1997). Task constraints in visual working memory, Vision Research, 38(1), 125-137.
12. Henderson, J. M., & Hollingworth, A. (1999). The role of fixation in detecting scene changes across saccades. Psychological Science, 10, 438-443.
13. Levin, D. T., & Simons, D. J. (1997). Failure to detect changes to attend objects in motion pictures. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4, 501-506.
14. McFarlane, D. C. (1997). Interruption of people in human-computer interaction: A general unifying definition of human interruption and taxonomy (Tech. Report NRL/FR/5510-97-9870). Washington, DC: Naval Research Laboratory.
15. Miller, G. A. (1956). The magical number seven plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing. Psychological Review, 63, 81-97.
16. Nugent, W. A., & Obermayer, R. W. (1999). Human-computer interaction (HCI) for alert warning and attention allocation systems of the multi-modal watchstation (MMWS). In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 43rd Annual Meeting (p. 1392). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
17. Obermayer, R. W., & Nugent, W. A. (2000, February). Human interaction design guidelines for an alert warning and attention allocation system: Vol. 1. Literature review (Prepared under Contract N66001-96-D-0048, Delivery Order 0067, to SPAWAR Systems Center, San Diego, California). San Diego, CA: Pacific Science and Engineering Group.
18. O'Regan, J. K. (1992). Solving the "real" mysteries of visual perception: The world as an outside memory. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 46, 461-488.
19. O'Regan, J. K., Rensink, R. A., & Clark, J. J. (1999). Change blindness as a result of mud splashes. Nature, 398, 34.
20. Osga, G., Van Orden, K., Campbell, N., Kellmeyer, D., & Lulue, D. (2002). Design and evaluation of warfighter task support methods in a multi-modal watchstation (Tech. Report 1874). San Diego, CA: SPAWAR Systems Center.
21. Pashler, H. (1987). Detecting conjunctions of color and form: Reassessing the serial search hypothesis. Perception and Psychophysics, 41, 191-201.
22. Rensink, R. A., O'Regan, J. K., & Clark, J. J. (1997). To see or not to see: The need for attention to perceive changes in scenes. Psychological Science, 8, 368-373.
23. Simons, D. J., & Levin, D. T. (1997). Change blindness. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 261-267.
24. Simons, D. J., & Levin, D. T. (1998). Failure to detect changes to people during a real-world interaction. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 5, 644-649.
25. Wright, M., Green, A., & Baker, S. (1999, June). How many Gabor stimuli does it take to produce change blindness? Presented at the Foursites Third Vision Research Symposium, Uxbridge, UK. Abstract retrieved May 14, 2004, from http://www.brunel.ac.uk/hssrjis/foursites/4symp99.html