Calendar

May 27

13th Intl. Conf. on New Interfaces for Musical Expression

May 28

Graphics Interface 2013

May 29

Intl. Workshop on Design and Spontaneity in Computer-Supported Collaborative Learning (DS-CSCL 2013)

May 22

“ User error: replace user and press any key to continue. ”

-- Popular computer one-liner

Share this quote on...
Get more quotes via RSS or by joining our Usability Quote of the Day Facebook Page

Featured chapter

Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann

Read Steve's chapter !

Help us help you!

Spread the word:
Donate
Other ways to help

D. Michael McAnulty

Add description

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Rename / change spelling

Add publication

← Button will not work: You have not enabled Javascript. How do I enable it?

Publications by D. Michael McAnulty (bibliography)

1994

Edit | Del

McAnulty, D. Michael, Hamilton, David B. and Leedom, Dennis K. (1994): Individual Differences in Pilots' Perception of Simulated Night Vision Goggle Scene Imagery and Superimposed Flight Symbology. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 38th Annual Meeting 1994. p. 977.

“During night vision goggle (NVG) helicopter flight, it is difficult and potentially unsafe for aviators to divert their attention from the external scene to scan cockpit instruments. To address this problem, systems (generically called ANVIS-HUD) have been developed that superimpose flight symbology on the imagery in one of the NVG intensifier tubes. However, previous research indicates that superimposed symbology may distract the pilot's attention from obstacle detection, recognition, and avoidance, and may interfere with proper scanning patterns. Flight scenarios that simulated NVG imagery only (IO), symbology only (SO), and the imagery and symbology combined (IS) were presented to 36 helicopter aviators in three sessions. The aviators monitored and responded to predefined targets (scene features and events and/or symbology out-of-tolerance states for four instruments). Both the percentage of correct detections and aviator reaction time were measured. The aviators detected and responded rapidly to a high percentage of IO and SO targets, but performance was better for symbology than for scene targets. Performance was significantly degraded in the IS condition, but the decrement was small compared to the increased information available. The aviators divided their attention effectively between the types of information. There were significant individual differences in ANVIS-HUD performance, however. Older, more experienced aviators performed better with the scene information; younger, less experienced aviators performed better with the symbology information. Presenting the symbology to the aviator's dominant eye generally produced better performance, but there were conflicting results. Most aviators developed a scanning strategy, but the pattern varied.”

1989

Edit | Del

Ruffner, John W. and McAnulty, D. Michael (1989): Checking Out the Checklist: Evaluation of a Job Performance Aid for Assessing Organizational Resource Management. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 33rd Annual Meeting 1989. pp. 820-824.

“As a job performance aid, the checklist has been applied to a wide variety of organizational requirements such as task analysis, survey questionnaire development, office automation, and maintenance. Although there are many examples of checklists that have been developed for different organizational requirements, there has been relatively little research performed to evaluate the checklists. One reason for this may be the lack of an acceptable methodology and evaluation criteria. This paper (a) describes a methodology and the criteria developed to evaluate the checklist used to assess the management of aviation resources by Army Reserve Component training facilities and units and (b) summarizes the results of the evaluation. Army National Guard and Army Reserve aviators and aviation technicians used 5-point rating scales to evaluate the Detectability, Importance, and Criticality of the checklist items. A data base was developed to summarize the Detectability, Importance, and Criticality information. In addition, a graphic decision aid was designed to help military managers decide whether to retain, revise, or delete individual checklist items. The methodology and criteria developed for this research may be applicable in other organizational contexts, especially those in which there is a requirement to evaluate an existing checklist and a full-scale validation effort is not feasible.”

Add publication