Effect of display location on control-display stereotype strength for translational and rotational controls with linear displays

Abstract

Experiments were designed to investigate the effects of control type and display location, relative to the operator, on the strength of control/display stereotypes. The Worringham and Beringer Visual Field principle and an extension of this principle for rotary controls (Hoffmann E.R., and Chan A.H.S. 2013). "The Worringham and Beringer 'Visual Field' Principle for Rotary Controls. Ergonomics." 56 (10): 1620-1624) indicated that, for a number of different control types (rotary and lever) on different planes, there should be no significant effect of the display location relative to the seated operator. Past data were surveyed and stereotype strengths listed. Experiments filled gaps where data are not available. Six different control types and seven display locations were used, as in the Frame of Reference Transformation Tool (FORT) model of Wickens et al. (Wickens, C.D., Keller, J.W., and Small, R.L. (2010). "Left. No, Right! Development of the Frame of Reference Transformation Tool (FORT)." Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 54th Annual Meeting September 2010, 54: 1022-1026). Control/display arrangements with high stereotype strengths were evaluated yielding data for designers of complex control/display arrangements where the control and display are in different planes and for where the operator is moving. It was found possible to predict display/control arrangements with high stereotype strength, based on past data. Practitioner Summary: Controls and displays in complex arrangements need to have high compatibility. These experiments provide arrangements for six different controls (rotary and translational) and seven different display locations relative to the operator.

The Psychological Cost of Making Control Responses in the Nonstereotype Direction

“…Contrary to this hypothesis, taking an example from the FORT model table for the up translation (UT) control with center forward display, a cost of 0 units is given for a frontal display, rising to 4 units for displays that are located to the left and right of the operator. These costs are contrary to experimental data (Chan & Hoffmann, 2015a, 2015b) and the visual field principle. Other costs given in the FORT model are very high when compared with recent experimental data, and the effect of these costs may be a deterrent to the use of some display/control arrangements that are in fact acceptable.…”

“…However, the FORT model gives values for the cost of using display and control relationships that are not in the stereotypical direction. Using the data collected by Chan and Hoffmann (2015b), we are able to show that the cost values used in FORT are not consistent with the values obtained with experimental data for the various display/control arrangements. In this paper, we calculate a new set of psychological costs based on empirical data for control movements and hence will take into consideration the effects of the visual field principle.…”

“…Many experiments have been reported investigating stereotype strength between control and display movements, and good combinations have been defined (e.g., Chan & Hoffmann, 2015a, 2015b). Chan and Hoffmann (2015a, 2015b) have determined stereotype strength for each of the arrangements for which Wickens et al (2010) developed cost values. In Chan and Hoffmann (2015b), 168 different arrangements of linearly moving displays and controls were investigated (six forms of control, seven display locations, and four display movement directions).…”

“…Chan and Hoffmann (2015a, 2015b) have determined stereotype strength for each of the arrangements for which Wickens et al (2010) developed cost values. In Chan and Hoffmann (2015b), 168 different arrangements of linearly moving displays and controls were investigated (six forms of control, seven display locations, and four display movement directions). Chan and Hoffmann (2015a) reported a similar experiment but using circular displays, where the indicator was initially at the 12, 3, 6, or 9 o’clock position.…”

“…Different principles were operational for different control and display arrangements. In each of the 168 cases of control, display, and display location, the relevant component stereotype principles were determined in Chan and Hoffmann (2015b), and it was shown that good predictions of stereotype strength could be made on the basis of the component stereotype principles. That paper had both experimental and theoretical significance due to the modeling of stereotype strength components.…”