Calendar

May 27

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

May 28

Graphics Interface 2013

May 29

Boston UXPA Usability and UX Conf. 2013

May 25

“ Civilization advances by extending the number of important operations which we can perform without thinking of them. ”

-- Alfred North Whitehead

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

Russell S. Cooper

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 Russell S. Cooper (bibliography)

1989

Edit | Del

Straus, Susan G. and Cooper, Russell S. (1989): Crew Structure, Automation, and Communication: Interaction of Social and Technological Factors on Complex Systems Performance. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 33rd Annual Meeting 1989. pp. 783-787.

“The effects of automation and task group social structure on group communication and performance are investigated in a simulated flight experiment. Fifty, two-person crews flew a ninety minute mission in a fully instrumented, GAT-II simulator. Crews were composed to be either homogeneous or heterogeneous with respect to crew members' flight experience and age. Approximately half of the crews flew with the aid of automated control the other half flew manually. All cockpit Communications were recorded and subjected to content analysis. Based on the analysis of twenty-four transcripts, there was no overall difference in communication patterns as a function of crew composition. However, the results indicated that heterogeneous crews tended to exchange a higher ratio of task relevant to task irrelevant statements compared to homogeneous crews, but this tendency was moderated by automation level. This interaction corresponds to performance data that show enhanced performance for heterogeneous crews in the automated condition. Additional evidence and discussion suggest that group structure and interaction may contribute to the observed performance differences.”

Edit | Del

Wickens, Christopher D., Marsh, Roger, Raby, Mireille, Straus, Susan, Cooper, Russell S., Hulin, Charles L. and Switzer, Fred (1989): Aircrew Performance as a Function of Automation and Crew Composition: A Simulator Study. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 33rd Annual Meeting 1989. pp. 792-796.

“In an experiment designed to examine the effect of crew composition and automation level on flight performance, fifty pilot-copilot crews flew a simulated instrument flight mission between three Michigan cities. Half of the crews were of homogeneous composition (both low or both high time), while half were heterogeneous consisting of one senior high time member and one junior low time member. Within each group, roughly half flew xxx with automated flight control and the other half flew manually. The flight was disrupted by periodic instrument failures. Results indicated that automation improved flight performance and lowered workload. While there was no overall difference in performance between homogeneous and heterogeneous crews, the latter group appeared to benefit more from the advantages that automation had to offer. The results are discussed in terms of the effect of automation on cockpit authority gradients, the role of flight experience, and of crew communications.”

Add publication