Target detection performance on a time-compressed radar display with both spatial and temporal cues was investigated. The effects of six variables (frame duration, noise level, clutter level, number of stored frames, target speed, and target direction) were examined using an orthogonal mixed-factor central-composite response surface experimental design. Results are discussed in terms of the contributions of spatial and temporal cues to detection performance. A methodological discussion of the experimental design is also included.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BoxG. E. P.WilsonK. B.On the experimental attainment of optimum conditions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological), 1951, 13, 1–45.
2.
ClarkC.ScanlanL. A.WilligesR. C.Mixed-factor response surface methodology central-composite design considerations. In RancM. P.Jr.MaloneT. B. (Eds.) Proceedings of the seventeenth annual meeting of the Human Factors Society.Santa Monica, Calif.: Human Factors Society, October 1973, 281–288.
3.
ClarkC.WilligesR. C.Central-composite response surface methodology design and analyses. Savoy, Ill.: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Institute of Aviation, Aviation Research Laboratory, Technical Report ARL-72-10/AFOSR-72-5, June 1972.
4.
ClarkC.WilligesR. C.Response surface methodology central-composite design for human performance research. Human Factors, 1973, 15, 295–310.
5.
GrahamC. H.Perception of movement. In GrahamC. H. (Ed.) Vision and visual perception.New York: Wiley, 1965.
6.
MartensR.People error in people experiments (Demand characteristics and experimenter bias). Paper presented at the Research Methodology Symposium, Research Council, AAHPER National Convention, Detroit, April 5, 1971.
7.
MillsR. G.WilligesR. C.Performance prediction in a single-operator simulated surveillance system. Human Factors, 1973, 15, 337–348.
8.
MilroyW. E.Development of improved display techniques for advanced shipboard display systems. In Naval Electronics Laboratory Center. Independent research and exploratory development: Annual report, fiscal year 1970. San Diego, Calif.: Author, Technical Document 92, 1970.
9.
MollJ. D.ScanlanL. A.Visual time compression II. Detecting moving targets in dense radar ground clutter. In KnowlesW. B.SandersM. S.MucklerF. A. (Eds.) Proceedings of the sixteenth annual meeting of the Human Factors Society.Santa Monica, Calif.: Human Factors Society, October 1972, 166–171.
10.
MyersR. H.Response surface methodology.Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1971.
11.
Naval Electronics Laboratory.Time compression studies. San Diego, Calif.: Author, Film Report 26, 1956.
12.
NeffW. S.A critical investigation of the visual apprehension of movement. American Journal of Psychology, 1936, 48, 1–42.
13.
PollackI.Detection of changes in spatial position: IV. Multiple display fields, display aiding, and interference. Human Factors, 1974, 16, 93–116.
14.
RosenthalR.RosnowR. L.Artifact in behavioral research.New York: Academic Press, 1969.
15.
ScanlanL. A.Visual time compression: Spatial and temporal cues. In press.
16.
ScanlanL. A.Application of response surface methodology to shape discrimination. Savoy, Ill.: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Institute of Aviation, Aviation Research Laboratory, Technical Report ARL-74-2/AFOSR-74-1, February 1974.
17.
ScanlanL. A.RoscoeS. N.WilligesR. C.Time-compressed displays for target detection. Aviation Research Monographs, 1971, 1, (3), 41–66.
18.
ScanlanL. A.StatonJ. M.Spatial and temporal aspects of target detection with visually time-compressed radar displays. In RancM. P.Jr.MaloneT. B. (Eds.) Proceedings of the seventeenth annual meeting of the Human Factors Society.Santa Monica, Calif.: Human Factors Society, October 1973, 25–30.
19.
SimonC. W.The use of central-composite designs in human factors engineering experiments. Culver City, Calif.: Hughes Aircraft Co., Display Systems and Human Factors Department, Technical Report AFOSR-70-6, December 1970.
