ASSESSMENT OF FOUR COCKPIT DISPLAYS.

William Wozniak, Daryle J. Gardner, Jeanette Lienert, Steven Gokie

Research output: Contribution to journalConference article

Abstract

Three experiments assessed four types of aircraft cockpit displays. One display was a circular format whereas the other three were vertical formats. Of the three vertical displays, one had a moving pointer, the remaining two had vertical bars whose length indicated engine status. The stimuli were prepared on 5 multiplied by 5 cm slides. Each slide portrayed either 2, 3, or 4 engines using a particular display-type. On any slide, exactly one of these engines was out of tolerance, i. e. , above or below a particular level. Half of the slides were prepared with one engine above tolerance, and half with one engine below. Subjects were instructed to view each slide and report which engine was out of tolerance. Response time and errors were the dependent measures.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Number of pages1
JournalProceedings of the Human Factors Society
Volume1
StatePublished - Dec 1 1984

Fingerprint

Cockpits (aircraft)
Display devices
Engines

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Engineering(all)

Cite this

ASSESSMENT OF FOUR COCKPIT DISPLAYS. / Wozniak, William; Gardner, Daryle J.; Lienert, Jeanette; Gokie, Steven.

In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society, Vol. 1, 01.12.1984.

Research output: Contribution to journalConference article

Wozniak, William ; Gardner, Daryle J. ; Lienert, Jeanette ; Gokie, Steven. / ASSESSMENT OF FOUR COCKPIT DISPLAYS. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society. 1984 ; Vol. 1.
@article{63c1cf3726eb4a3ba5e437584002fa64,
title = "ASSESSMENT OF FOUR COCKPIT DISPLAYS.",
abstract = "Three experiments assessed four types of aircraft cockpit displays. One display was a circular format whereas the other three were vertical formats. Of the three vertical displays, one had a moving pointer, the remaining two had vertical bars whose length indicated engine status. The stimuli were prepared on 5 multiplied by 5 cm slides. Each slide portrayed either 2, 3, or 4 engines using a particular display-type. On any slide, exactly one of these engines was out of tolerance, i. e. , above or below a particular level. Half of the slides were prepared with one engine above tolerance, and half with one engine below. Subjects were instructed to view each slide and report which engine was out of tolerance. Response time and errors were the dependent measures.",
author = "William Wozniak and Gardner, {Daryle J.} and Jeanette Lienert and Steven Gokie",
year = "1984",
month = "12",
day = "1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "1",
journal = "Proceedings of the Human Factors Society",
issn = "0163-5182",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - ASSESSMENT OF FOUR COCKPIT DISPLAYS.

AU - Wozniak, William

AU - Gardner, Daryle J.

AU - Lienert, Jeanette

AU - Gokie, Steven

PY - 1984/12/1

Y1 - 1984/12/1

N2 - Three experiments assessed four types of aircraft cockpit displays. One display was a circular format whereas the other three were vertical formats. Of the three vertical displays, one had a moving pointer, the remaining two had vertical bars whose length indicated engine status. The stimuli were prepared on 5 multiplied by 5 cm slides. Each slide portrayed either 2, 3, or 4 engines using a particular display-type. On any slide, exactly one of these engines was out of tolerance, i. e. , above or below a particular level. Half of the slides were prepared with one engine above tolerance, and half with one engine below. Subjects were instructed to view each slide and report which engine was out of tolerance. Response time and errors were the dependent measures.

AB - Three experiments assessed four types of aircraft cockpit displays. One display was a circular format whereas the other three were vertical formats. Of the three vertical displays, one had a moving pointer, the remaining two had vertical bars whose length indicated engine status. The stimuli were prepared on 5 multiplied by 5 cm slides. Each slide portrayed either 2, 3, or 4 engines using a particular display-type. On any slide, exactly one of these engines was out of tolerance, i. e. , above or below a particular level. Half of the slides were prepared with one engine above tolerance, and half with one engine below. Subjects were instructed to view each slide and report which engine was out of tolerance. Response time and errors were the dependent measures.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0021650157&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0021650157&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Conference article

AN - SCOPUS:0021650157

VL - 1

JO - Proceedings of the Human Factors Society

JF - Proceedings of the Human Factors Society

SN - 0163-5182

ER -