Table of Contents:

SUMMARY

Intermodal interfaces are part of the stepping-stone process that allows real- world meaningful information to be collected, transmitted, stored, analyzed, or otherwise used to make actionable decisions. In work, domains where the timeliness of such activities is significant, such as in emergency response command and control, the speed and accuracy of this data collection has been shown to improve experimentally by interface design variations that may seem inconsequential at first glance. Furthermore, careful selection of interface components can be used to facilitate better situation awareness, which logically thereby should lead to better decision making. The development of intermodal interfaces should be grounded in work domain analysis with consideration of the informational demands of NDM. These requirements bring intermodal interfaces squarely within the realm of cognitive systems.

REFERENCES

Boyd, J. R. (1996). The essence of winning and losing. (unpublished lecture notes).

Endsley, M. R. (1988). Situation awareness global assessment technique (SAGAT). Aerospace and Electronics Conference 1988, NAECON 1988, Proceedings of the IEEE 1988 National. Dayton Convention Center, Dayton, OH.

Endsley, M. R. (2000). Theoretical underpinnings of situation awareness: A critical review. In M. R. Endsley & G. D. J. Mahwah (Eds.), Situation awareness analysis and measurement. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Endsley, M. R., Selcon, S. J., Hardiman, T. D., & Croft, D. G. (1998). A comparative analysis of sagat and sart for evaluations of situation awareness. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 42(1), 82-86.

Floridi, L. (2006). A look into the future impact of ICT on our lives. The Information Society, 23(1), 59-64.

Grant, T., & Kooter, B. (2005). Comparing OODA & other models as operational view C2 architecture. Proceedings of the 10th International Command and Control Research Technology Symposium. Washington, DC.

Klein, G. (2008). Naturalistic decision making. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 50(3), 456-460.

Lipshitz, R. (1995). Converging themes in the study of decision making in realistic settings. In G. Klein, J. Orasanu, R. Calderwood, & C. E. Zsambok (Eds.), Decision making in action: Models and methods (pp. 103-137). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.

Vicente, K. J. (1999). Ecological interface design: Supporting operator adaptation, continuous learning, & distributed, collaborative work. Conference on Human Centered Processes-HCP’1999, Brest, France.

Wohl, J. G. (1981). Force management decision requirements for air force tactical command and control. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 11(9), 618-639.

 
Source
< Prev   CONTENTS   Source   Next >