A Study of Control Performance in Low Frequency Motion Workstation
Many studies have found the performance of using non-keyboard input devices (NKID) was affected by motion environment, but few of them have considered the interaction between motion direction and the approach angle on manipulating NKID. In this study, an experiment was conducted to investigate the effect of different approach angles (0o, 45o, 90o, 135o, 180o, 225o, 270o, 315o, 360o) and motion directions (roll and pitch) on the performance (movement time and error rate) of using trackball. The results showed that the main effect of approach angle on movement time was significant, whereas there was neither significant interaction nor the main effect of motion direction. The effects of approach angle and motion direction on the error rate were not significant. Some suggestions on the control console and interface design were proposed based on the results of the experiment.
KeywordsMotion Trackball Roll Pitch
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Woods, V., Hastings, S., Buckle, P., Haslam, R.: Ergonomics of using a mouse or other non-keyboard input device. Health and Safety Executive (2002)Google Scholar
- 2.Grandt, M., Pfendler, C., Mooshage, O.: Empirical Comparison of Five Input Devices for Anti-Air Warfare Operators. In: 8th International Command and Control Research and Technology Symposium (ICCRTS) on Information Age Transformation Washington, DC (2003)Google Scholar
- 3.Boritz, J., Booth, K., Cowan, W.: Fitts’ law studies of directional mouse movement. In: Graphics Interface,Canadian Human Machine Communications Society. Canada (1991)Google Scholar
- 4.MacKenzie, I.S., Buxton, W.: Extending Fitts’ law to two dimensional tasks. In: Proceedings of the CHI 1992 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (1992)Google Scholar
- 6.Hancock, S.M., Booth, K.S.: Improving Menu Placement Strategies for Pen Input. In: Graphics Interface. Ontario, London (2004)Google Scholar
- 7.Lewis, C.H., Griffin, M.J.: A review of the effects of vibration on visual acuity and continuous manual control. part. II-Continuous manual control. Journal of Sound and Vibration 56(3), 415–457 (1978)Google Scholar
- 10.Hill, S.G., Tauson, R.A.: Soldier Performance Issues in C2 On the Move. In: 10th International Command and Control Technology Symposium (ICCRTS) (2005)Google Scholar
- 11.Griffin, M.J.: Handbook of Human Vibration. Academic Press, London (1990)Google Scholar
- 12.Wertheim, A.H., Ooms, J., De Regt, G.P., Wientjes, C.J.E.: Incidence and severeness of sea sickness: validation of rating scale. TNO Human Factors Research Institute (1992)Google Scholar
- 13.Colwell, J.L.: NATO: Questionnaire: Correlation between ship motion, fatigue, sea sickness and naval task performance. In: Human Factor in Ship Design and Operation. London (2000)Google Scholar
- 14.Mackenzie, I.S., Seller, A., Buxton, W.: A comparison of input devices in elemental pointing and dragging tasks. In: Proceedings of the CHI 1991 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (1991)Google Scholar
- 15.McCormick, E.J., Sanders, M.S.: Human Factors in Engineering and Design. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York (1992)Google Scholar