Selecting and Representing Information Structures for Battlefield Decision Systems

Badre, Albert N.

doi:10.21236/ada071117

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 5 publications

(5 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For example, in military tactical environments, empirical studies have identified a number of differences among individuals in terms of level of expertise, cognitive abilities (specifically, ability to perform mental 'what-if simulations), ability to visualize situations from multiple perspectives, ability to abstract relevant information, and preferred style of information presentation (e.g., textual vs. visual, abstract vs. concrete, etc.) (Hammond, Hamm, Grassia & Pearson, 1987;Deckert, Entin, Entin, MacMillan & Serfaty, 1994;Badre, 1978). Studies of tactical planning and command decision-making identify features that characterize expert performance and thus distinguish between expert and novice tactical planners Tolcott et al, 1989;Fallesen, 1993).…”

Section: Individual Differences Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

ABAIS: Affect and Belief Adaptive Interface System

Hudlická¹,

Billingsley²

1999

PsycEXTRA Dataset

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Daws Highway, Suite 1204 Arlington VA 22202-4302. and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank)2. REPORT DATE February 1999 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED Final Report, March 1998 -February 1999 TITLE AND SUBTITLE ABAIS: AFFECT and Belief Adaptive Interface System AUTHOR(S)Eva Hudlicka, John Billingsley We describe an Affect and Belief Adaptive Interface System (ABAIS) designed to compensate for performance biases caused by users' affective states and active beliefs. The ABAIS architecture implements an adaptive methodology consisting of four steps: sensing/inferring user affective state and performance-relevant beliefs; identifying their potential impact on performance; selecting a compensatory strategy; and implementing this strategy in terms of specific GUI adaptations. ABAIS provides a generic adaptive framework for exploring a variety of user assessment methods (e.g., knowledge-based, self-reports, diagnostic tasks, physiological sensing), and GUI adaptation strategies (e.g., content-and format-based). The ABAIS performance bias prediction is based on empirical findings from emotion research, and knowledge of specific task requirements. The initial ABAIS prototype is demonstrated in the context of an Air Force combat task, uses a knowledge-based approach to assess the pilot's anxiety level, and modifies selected cockpit instrument displays in response to detected increases in anxiety levels. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)Psychometrix SUBJECT TERMS SummaryPurpose As decision-support systems (DSS) and associated user interface (UI) technologies mature and proliferate into mission-critical applications, and increasingly heterogeneous user populations, it becomes particularly important that they accommodate individual user characteristics. While some progress has been made in user-modeling and adaptive user interfaces, the majority of existing systems continue to assume normative performance, and fail to adapt to the individual characteristics of particular users, whether those that are relatively stable over time, or those that are susceptible to situational influences. This is particularly true for adaptation with respect of the user's affective state.Current lack of accommodation of individual variations in performance in most humanmachine systems can lead to non-optimal behavior at best, and critical errors with disastrous consequences at worst.The purpose of this P...

show abstract