1 / 15

Research

Research. Part 4. Interface Main Effect (Reaction Time Means). 5.6. Reac. Time (Sec.). 4.1. 1.3. Interface. Problem Main Effect (Reaction Time Means). Reac. Time (Sec.). 4.0. 3.2. Problem. Question Main Effect (Reaction Time Means). 4.8. Reac. Time (Sec.). 2.5.

jena
Télécharger la présentation

Research

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Research Part 4

  2. Interface Main Effect(Reaction Time Means) 5.6 Reac. Time (Sec.) 4.1 1.3 Interface

  3. Problem Main Effect(Reaction Time Means) Reac. Time (Sec.) 4.0 3.2 Problem

  4. Question Main Effect(Reaction Time Means) 4.8 Reac. Time (Sec.) 2.5 Question Complexity

  5. Question Complexity: Low Complexity High Complexity

  6. Interface X Question InteractionReaction Time Means 8.6 Baseline Alternate Independent Reac. Time (Sec.) Cognitively Engineered 4.0 4.2 2.3 1.6 1.1 Question Complexity

  7. Interface Main Effect(Accuracy Means) 99% 91% 90% Accuracy (Percent) Interface

  8. Question Main Effect(Accuracy Means) 97% 91% Accuracy (Percent) Question Complexity

  9. Interface x Question Interaction(Accuracy Means) 95% 97% 100% 99% 88% 85% Accur. (Percent) Question Complexity

  10. TLX Workload Totals (Means) Cognitive = 45, Alternate =124, Baseline = 137 Cognitive has 67% less workload than baseline and 64% less workload than alternate

  11. ANOVA Main effect for interface: Baseline had greater workload than cognitive Alternate had greater workload than cognitive Main effect for problem at P<.001 I.E. Firing had a greater workload than ownship Interaction effect of Interface & Problem at P<.03 Baseline & Alternate =firing had a greater workload than ownship Coginitive = No significant difference

  12. Preference 20 out of 24 preferred the cognitively engineered interface 83% of the participants

  13. Friedman Significant Test Results were significant at a .01 significance level. The cognitively engineered interface was preferred to the baseline and to the alternate.

  14. Findings: • All hypotheses were supported. The cognitively- engineered interface - was more accurate - had a better reaction time - had less workload - was preferred • The results were analogous in every case to the application of the cognitive design principles.

  15. Recommendations for Further Research Study the impact of specific cognitive –design principles on performance. Study the acceptance of the various interface designs (i.e. baseline, cognitive, alternate) in the targeted user community which was submariners. Apply the 10 cognitive design principles to a completely different domain.

More Related