Number of co-authors:12
Number of publications with 3 favourite co-authors:Kent E. Higgins:1Stephen Cinq-Mars:1Jannick P. Rolland:1
Edward J. Rinalducci's 3 most productive colleagues in number of publications:Jannick P. Rolland:24Daniel P. Mapes:4Catherine Meyer:3
The moment clients realize that revisions are not an all-you-can-eat buffet, suddenly they realize they are not hungry.
-- Lester Beall
Read the fascinating history of Wearable Computing, told by its father, Steve Mann
Read Steve's chapter !
Edward J. Rinalducci
Publications by Edward J. Rinalducci (bibliography)
Rolland, Jannick P., Meyer, Catherine, Arthur, K. and Rinalducci, Edward J. (2002): Method of Adjustments versus Method of Constant Stimuli in the Quantification of Accuracy and Precision of Rendered Depth in Head-Mounted Displays. In Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 11 (6) pp. 610-625.
Rinalducci, Edward J. (1996): Characteristics of Visual Fidelity in the Virtual Environment. In Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 5 (3) pp. 330-345.
Rinalducci, Edward J., Mapes, Daniel P., Cinq-Mars, Stephen and Higgins, Kent E. (1996): Determining the Field of View in HMDs: A Psychophysical Method. In Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 5 (3) pp. 353-356.
Rinalducci, Edward J., Lassiter, Donald L., MacArthur, Mary, Piersal, James and Mitchell, Lawrence K. (1989): Further Experiments on the Effects of Foveal Load on Peripheral Vision. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 33rd Annual Meeting 1989. pp. 1450-1453.
The main objective of this research was to investigate the effects of foveal load on sensitivity in the peripheral visual field. The first experiment was presented at previous meeting of the Human Factors Society. Here, foveal load was manipulated by comparing the fixation of a cross vs. a simple first-order compensatory tracking task display. Peripheral sensitivity was determined simultaneously for light flashes presented at different eccentricities along the horizontal meridian. In general, the results showed no losses in peripheral sensitivity or a "tunnel vision" effect under the experimental conditions employed. Three more experiments have been carried out since that presentation. More complex tracking tasks have been employed in order to vary foveal load and the difficulty of the perimetry task has also been manipulated in one experiment by including lights on the vertical meridian. Whether or not a loss or a gain in peripheral sensitivity depends upon the complexity of the foveal task and to some extent the perimetry task. Results are discussed in terms of arousal and resource theory.
© All rights reserved Rinalducci et al. and/or Human Factors Society
Brown, Barbara S., Dismukes, Key and Rinalducci, Edward J. (1982): Video Display Terminals and Vision of Workers: Summary and Overview of a Symposium. In Behaviour and Information Technology, 1 (2) pp. 121-140.
This summary discusses issues raised at a National Research Council symposium on vision and VDT work, held at the request of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Symposium participants critically reviewed laboratory studies of visual function and field surveys of visual complaints of VDT operators to determine what conclusions can be drawn about the prevalence, severity, causes of, and possible remedies for reported difficulties. Although speakers' perspectives differed, a number of points appeared to gain consensus: (i) properly designed epidemiological studies comparing the incidence of visual problems in VDT operators with that in non-VDT workers are needed. (ii) Visual issues are closely interrelated with ergonomic and job design variables, and use of multivariate statistical analysis is necessary to determine what specific aspects of work involving VDTs may contribute to visual and other complaints. (iii) No scientifically valid study has establish that VDT use causes harm, in the sense of damage, to the visual system. (iv) Existing knowledge indicates a number of measures that could be taken to improve worker comfort and performance: use of high-quality displays; control of workplace lighting conditions; application of principles of anthropometric design; and consideration of workers' needs in design of jobs. (v) Surveys of radiation emissions from VDTs indicate that levels of radiation are far below U.S. occupational exposure standards. Published data provide no evidence that cateracts are associated with VDT use. (vi) Standards should be based on research. Differing opinions on whether setting standards is useful and appropriate point to the need for caution in this area. Needs for further research were identified.
© All rights reserved Brown et al. and/or Taylor and Francis
Show this list on your homepage
Join the technology elite and advance:
Changes to this page (author)11 Feb 2010: Modified01 Jun 2009: Added
01 Jun 2009: Added
01 Jun 2009: Added
26 Jun 2007: Added
28 Apr 2003: Added
Page maintainer: The Editorial Team