Normative and Descriptive Models for Training-System Design

  • Paul J. Sticha


The increasing cost of training and limitations in the military training budget have led to increased emphasis on training cost-effectiveness. In addition, advances in instructional technology have greatly increased the options that are available to the training-system designer. Current training system design processes do not address the cost-effectiveness of the wide range of training-device and simulator options available to the training designer. This paper describes a system of models for the optimization of simulation-based training systems (OSBATS). The OSBATS system contains both normative and descriptive modeling components. The normative modeling components provide a structure for the decision-making processes involved in training-system design. The descriptive modeling components support the decision process, and characterize the effectiveness, efficiency, and costs involved in training-device development and use. The OSBATS system provides a coherent set of procedures for decision making and a set of tools to aid the designer in following these procedures.


Normative Model Training Time Training System Response Requirement Simulator Training 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Adelman, L. (1982). Involving users in the design of decision-analytic aids: The principal factor in successful implementation. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 33, 333–342.Google Scholar
  2. Bickley, W. R. (1980). Training device effectiveness: Formulation and evaluation of a methodology (Research Rep. 1291 ). Alexandria, VA: U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.Google Scholar
  3. Card, S. K., Moran, T. P., & Newell, A. (1983). The psychology of human-computer interaction. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  4. Carter, G., & Trollip, S. (1980). A constrained maximization extension to incremental transfer effectiveness, or, how to mix your training technologies. Human Factors, 22, 141–152.Google Scholar
  5. Cronholm, J. N. (1985). The optimization of training systems. Proceedings of the Symposium on the Transfer of Training to Military Operational Systems (pp. 237–259 ). Brussels, Belgium: NATO.Google Scholar
  6. Department of Defense Training Data and Analysis Center (1985). Training resources: Macro level training funds prototype data base preliminary results. Orlando, FL: Author.Google Scholar
  7. Newell, A., & Rosenbloom, P. (1981). Mechanisms of skill acquisition and the law of practice. In J. R. Anderson (Ed.), Cognitive skills and their acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  8. Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense, Force Management and Personnel (1987). Department of Defense military manpower training. report for FY 1988. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
  9. Povenmire, H. K., & Roscoe, S. N. (1973). Incremental transfer effectiveness of a ground-based general aviation trainer. Human Factors, 15, 534–542.Google Scholar
  10. Roscoe, S. N. (1971). Incremental Transfer effectiveness. Human Factors, 13, 561–567.Google Scholar
  11. Sprague, R. H., Jr., & Carlson, E. D. (1982). Building effective decision support systems. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  12. Sticha, P. J., Blacksten, H. R., Buede, D. M., & Cross, K. D. (1986). Optimization of simulation-based training systems. Volume III: Model description (Final Report 86–13 ). Alexandria, VA: Human Resources Research Organization.Google Scholar
  13. Sticha, P. J., Singer, M. J., Blacksten, H. R., Mumaw, R. J., & Buede, D. M. (1987). Optimization of simulation-based training systems: Year II report (Interim Report 87–30 ). Alexandria, VA: Human Resources Research Organization.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul J. Sticha
    • 1
  1. 1.Human Resources Research OrganizationAlexandriaUSA

Personalised recommendations