驾驶舱交通和天气信息显示:三维透视与二维共面绘制和数据库集成的影响

IF 1 4区 心理学 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED International Journal of Aerospace Psychology Pub Date : 2017-04-03 DOI:10.1080/10508414.2017.1366270
C. Wickens, J. Ward
{"title":"驾驶舱交通和天气信息显示:三维透视与二维共面绘制和数据库集成的影响","authors":"C. Wickens, J. Ward","doi":"10.1080/10508414.2017.1366270","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Objective: The objectives were to evaluate the viability of 3-dimensional (3D) perspective aircraft hazard displays for traffic and weather, in isolation, and when the two were integrated into a single display panel. Background: Prior research identified the costs of such 3D perspective hazard displays, presented from an exocentric perspective, because of their ambiguity in presenting spatial relations in an unstructured 3D space. Research also supported the advantage of display overlay, particularly when both databases (traffic and weather) need to be integrated to make hazard avoidance judgments. The two variables had not been examined in conjunction. Method: Seventeen certified flight instructors flew a series of hazard avoidance maneuvers in a part-task simulator, with four displays, created by the combination of 3D versus 2-dimensional (2D) perspective and separate versus overlay hazard formats. Positioning of traffic and weather that would make it necessary to avoid hazards was designed to allow the study of both the strengths of overlay and weaknesses of 3D integration. Results: The data clearly indicated that hazard avoidance was worse with the 3D perspective display, for both traffic and weather hazards, and pointed to ambiguity as the cause. Display overlay was better than separation, but only when the task required consulting both databases. Conclusion: 3D perspective displays are not advised for hazard presentation on the flight deck. Overlays can be helpful, as long as clutter issues are addressed.","PeriodicalId":41693,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Aerospace Psychology","volume":"27 1","pages":"44 - 56"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10508414.2017.1366270","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cockpit Displays of Traffic and Weather Information: Effects of 3D Perspective Versus 2D Coplanar Rendering and Database Integration\",\"authors\":\"C. Wickens, J. Ward\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10508414.2017.1366270\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Objective: The objectives were to evaluate the viability of 3-dimensional (3D) perspective aircraft hazard displays for traffic and weather, in isolation, and when the two were integrated into a single display panel. Background: Prior research identified the costs of such 3D perspective hazard displays, presented from an exocentric perspective, because of their ambiguity in presenting spatial relations in an unstructured 3D space. Research also supported the advantage of display overlay, particularly when both databases (traffic and weather) need to be integrated to make hazard avoidance judgments. The two variables had not been examined in conjunction. Method: Seventeen certified flight instructors flew a series of hazard avoidance maneuvers in a part-task simulator, with four displays, created by the combination of 3D versus 2-dimensional (2D) perspective and separate versus overlay hazard formats. Positioning of traffic and weather that would make it necessary to avoid hazards was designed to allow the study of both the strengths of overlay and weaknesses of 3D integration. Results: The data clearly indicated that hazard avoidance was worse with the 3D perspective display, for both traffic and weather hazards, and pointed to ambiguity as the cause. Display overlay was better than separation, but only when the task required consulting both databases. Conclusion: 3D perspective displays are not advised for hazard presentation on the flight deck. Overlays can be helpful, as long as clutter issues are addressed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41693,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Aerospace Psychology\",\"volume\":\"27 1\",\"pages\":\"44 - 56\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-04-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10508414.2017.1366270\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Aerospace Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508414.2017.1366270\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Aerospace Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10508414.2017.1366270","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

摘要目的:本研究的目的是评估交通和天气的三维视角飞机危险显示的可行性,并将两者整合到一个显示面板中。背景:先前的研究确定了这种从外心角度呈现的3D视角危险显示的成本,因为它们在非结构化3D空间中呈现空间关系时存在模糊性。研究还支持显示叠加的优势,特别是当两个数据库(交通和天气)需要集成以做出避免危险的判断时。这两个变量并没有被结合起来研究。方法:17名经过认证的飞行教官在一个部分任务模拟器中进行了一系列的避险演习,该模拟器有四个显示器,由3D与2D (2D)视角以及独立与覆盖危险格式的组合创建。对交通和天气进行定位,使其有必要避开危险,这是为了研究叠加的优点和3D集成的缺点。结果:数据清楚地表明,对于交通和天气灾害,3D视角显示的避害效果较差,并指出模糊性是原因。显示叠加比分离要好,但只有在任务需要同时查询两个数据库时才会这样。结论:不建议在飞行甲板上使用3D透视显示器进行危险展示。覆盖是有帮助的,只要杂乱的问题得到解决。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Cockpit Displays of Traffic and Weather Information: Effects of 3D Perspective Versus 2D Coplanar Rendering and Database Integration
ABSTRACT Objective: The objectives were to evaluate the viability of 3-dimensional (3D) perspective aircraft hazard displays for traffic and weather, in isolation, and when the two were integrated into a single display panel. Background: Prior research identified the costs of such 3D perspective hazard displays, presented from an exocentric perspective, because of their ambiguity in presenting spatial relations in an unstructured 3D space. Research also supported the advantage of display overlay, particularly when both databases (traffic and weather) need to be integrated to make hazard avoidance judgments. The two variables had not been examined in conjunction. Method: Seventeen certified flight instructors flew a series of hazard avoidance maneuvers in a part-task simulator, with four displays, created by the combination of 3D versus 2-dimensional (2D) perspective and separate versus overlay hazard formats. Positioning of traffic and weather that would make it necessary to avoid hazards was designed to allow the study of both the strengths of overlay and weaknesses of 3D integration. Results: The data clearly indicated that hazard avoidance was worse with the 3D perspective display, for both traffic and weather hazards, and pointed to ambiguity as the cause. Display overlay was better than separation, but only when the task required consulting both databases. Conclusion: 3D perspective displays are not advised for hazard presentation on the flight deck. Overlays can be helpful, as long as clutter issues are addressed.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
7.70%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Qualitative Analysis of General Aviation Pilots’ Aviation Safety Reporting System Incident Narratives Using the Human Factors Analysis and Classification System Effective Monitoring for Early Detection of Hypoxia in Fighter Pilots The Effects of Aeronautical Decision-Making Models on Student Pilots’ Situational Awareness and Cognitive Workload in Simulated Non-Normal Flight Deck Environment The Relationship between Preparation, Impression Management, and Interview Performance in High-Stakes Personnel Selection: A Field Study of Airline Pilot Applicants It Was This Wing Wasn’t It? Identifying the Importance of Verbal Communication in Aviation Maintenance
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1