In this study, we investigated the possibility to evaluate the impact of different avionic technologies on the mental workload of helicopter's pilots by measuring their brain activity with the EEG during a series of simulated missions carried out at AgustaWestland facilities in Yeovil (UK). The tested avionic technologies were: i) Head-Up Display (HUD); ii) Head-Mounted Display (HMD); iii) Full Conformal symbology (FC); iv) Flight Guidance (FG) symbology; v) Synthetic Vision System (SVS); and vi) Radar Obstacles (RO) detection system. It has been already demonstrated that in cognitive tasks, when the cerebral workload increases the EEG power spectral density (PSD) in theta band over frontal areas increases, and the EEG PSD in alpha band decreases over parietal areas. A mental workload index (MWL) has been here defined as the ratio between the frontal theta and parietal alpha EEG PSD values. Such index has been used for testing and comparing the different avionic technologies. Results suggested that the HUD provided a significant (p<;.05) workload reduction across all the flight scenarios with respect to the other technologies. In addition, the simultaneous use of FC and FG technologies (FC+FG) produced a significant decrement of the workload (p<;.01) with respect to the use of only the FC. Moreover, the use of the SVS technology provided on Head Down Display (HDD) with the simultaneous use of FC+FG and the RO seemed to produce a lower cerebral workload when compared with the use of only the FC. Interestingly, the workload estimation by means of subjective measures, provided by pilots through a NASA-TLX questionnaire, did not provide any significant differences among the different flight scenarios. These results suggested that the proposed MWL cognitive neurometrics could be used as a reliable measure of the user's mental workload, being a valid indicator for the comparison and the test of different avionic technologies.

New solutions in operational environments are often, among objective measurements, evaluated by using subjective assessment and judgment from experts. Anyhow, it has been demonstrated that subjective measures suffer from poor resolution due to a high intra and inter-operator variability. Also, performance measures, if available, could provide just partial information, since an operator could achieve the same performance but experiencing a different workload. In this study, we aimed to demonstrate: (i) the higher resolution of neurophysiological measures in comparison to subjective ones; and (ii) how the simultaneous employment of neurophysiological measures and behavioral ones could allow a holistic assessment of operational tools. In this regard, we tested the effectiveness of an electroencephalography (EEG)-based neurophysiological index (WEEG index) in comparing two different solutions (i.e., Normal and Augmented) in terms of experienced workload. In this regard, 16 professional air traffic controllers (ATCOs) have been asked to perform two operational scenarios. Galvanic Skin Response (GSR) has also been recorded to evaluate the level of arousal (i.e., operator involvement) during the two scenarios execution. NASA-TLX questionnaire has been used to evaluate the perceived workload, and an expert was asked to assess performance achieved by the ATCOs. Finally, reaction times on specific operational events relevant for the assessment of the two solutions, have also been collected. Results highlighted that the Augmented solution induced a local increase in subjects performance (Reaction times). At the same time, this solution induced an increase in the workload experienced by the participants (WEEG). Anyhow, this increase is still acceptable, since it did not negatively impact the performance and has to be intended only as a consequence of the higher engagement of the ATCOs. This behavioral effect is totally in line with physiological results obtained in terms of arousal (GSR), that increased during the scenario with augmentation. Subjective measures (NASA-TLX) did not highlight any significant variation in perceived workload. These results suggest that neurophysiological measure provide additional information than behavioral and subjective ones, even at a level of few seconds, and its employment during the pre-operational activities (e.g., design process) could allow a more holistic and accurate evaluation of new solutions.

This study aims at investigating the possibility to employ neurophysiological measures to assess the humanmachine interaction effectiveness. Such a measure can be used to compare new technologies or solutions, with the final purpose to enhance operator's experience and increase safety. In the present work, two different interaction modalities (Normal and Augmented) related to Air Traffic Management field have been compared, by involving 10 professional air traffic controllers in a control tower simulated environment. Experimental task consisted in locating aircrafts in different airspace positions by using the sense of hearing. In one modality (i.e. "Normal"), all the sound sources (aircrafts) had the same amplification factor. In the "Augmented" modality, the amplification factor of the sound sources located along the participant head sagittal axis was increased, while the intensity of sound sources located outside this axis decreased. In other words, when the user oriented his head toward the aircraft position, the related sound was amplified. Performance data, subjective questionnaires (i.e. NASA-TLX) and neurophysiological measures (i.e. EEG-based) related to the experienced workload have been collected. Results showed higher significant performance achieved by the users during the "Augmented" modality with respect to the "Normal" one, supported by a significant decreasing in experienced workload, evaluated by using EEG-based index. In addition, Performance and EEG-based workload index showed a significant negative correlation. On the contrary, subjective workload analysis did not show any significant trend. This result is a demonstration of the higher effectiveness of neurophysiological measures with respect to subjective ones for Human-Computer Interaction assessment.

No abstract

No abstract