Superimposition, symbology, visual attention, and the head-up display.
In two experiments we examined a number of related factors postulated to influence head-up display (HUD) performance. We addressed the benefit of reduced scanning and the cost of increasing the number of elements in the visual field by comparing a superimposed HUD with an identical display in a head-down position in varying visibility conditions. We explored the extent to which the characteristics of HUD symbology support a division of attention by contrasting conformal symbology (which links elements of the display image to elements of the far domain) with traditional instrument landing system (ILS) symbology. Together the two experiments provide strong evidence that minimizing scanning between flight instruments and the far domain contributes substantially to the observed HUD performance advantage. Experiment 1 provides little evidence for a performance cost attributable to visual clutter. In Experiment 2 the pattern of differences in lateral tracking error between conformal and traditional ILS symbology supports the hypothesis that, to the extent that the symbology forms an object with the far domain, attention may be divided between the superimposed image and its counterpart in the far domain.
Martin-Emerson
R
R
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, USA.
Wickens
C D
CD
D000337:Aerospace Medicine; D001288:Attention; D001359:Aviation / Q000295:instrumentation*; D003071:Cognition; D003196:Computer Graphics; D003626:Data Display; D004867:Equipment Design; D006804:Ergonomics; D006801:Humans; D011930:Reaction Time; D012438:Saccades; D013647:Task Performance and Analysis; D014794:Visual Fields; D014796:Visual Perception