Search

Successful navigation generally requires an accurate spatial representation of the environment. However, under guided navigation (i.e. route directions are provided by a GPS system or car passenger) no detailed representation of space is necessary because one only needs to follow directions. The first experiment separated components of navigation, spatial decision-making (planning and selection of routes) and navigational control (executing complex actions such as stopping and steering) for environmental learning. Spatial knowledge was assessed using multiple measures (spatial updating using immersive, head-mounted virtual reality and map construction). More accurate environmental knowledge was acquired when spatial decision-making was present at learning, ps < .001, ds > .81. No difference in spatial knowledge was found between active navigation and spatial decision-making by itself, ps > .83, ds < .07. This finding indicates that the weakened spatial knowledge with control alone (guided navigation) can be explained by the absence of spatial decision-making. Experiments 2 and 3 investigated the use of aids for ameliorating the loss of spatial knowledge for guided navigation with auditory directions. In Experiment 2, guided navigation was augmented using visual aids (primarily egocentric) which reinforced the locations of landmarks. In Experiment 3, guided navigation was augmented by adding cardinal directions (e.g. north), which are exocentric, to the auditory guidance, presented either with monaural sound or stereo sound which corresponded to environmental headings. Spatial knowledge in Experiments 2 and 3 was assessed using route replication, novel route execution, and map construction. Contrary to the hypotheses, the aids did not improve all measures of environmental knowledge. Instead, there was a match between the particular reference frame reinforced by the aid and the relevant frame of reference for the measure of spatial knowledge. In Experiment 2, the visual aids improved accuracy for replicating routes, p = .01, d = .75, this measure is egocentric. In Experiment 3, the stereo and monaural cardinal directions improved accuracy for executing a novel route, a directional measure of survey knowledge, ps < .06, ds > .52, which is egocentric and exocentric.

Augmented-reality (AR) displays render virtual content overlaid on the real world. AR offers great potential for Soldiers to immediately perceive relevant tactical information without the need to consult a physical map or other reference material, or divert their eyes away from the immediate environment. However, realizing the potential benefits of using AR requires that the conformal subset of virtual content is perceived in the correct physical location. Conformal virtual content must be correctly associated with the physical location, object, or person intended to be augmented. In this report, we provide emerging recommendations aimed at improving spatial perception of virtual content.

In light of the Army’s intent to leverage advances in Artificial Intelligence (AI) for augmenting dismounted Soldier Lethality through the development of in-scope and Heads-Up Display (HUD)-based Automatic Target Recognition (ATR) systems, the Combat Capabilities Development Command U. S. Army Research Laboratory’s Human Research and Engineering Directorate (CCDC-ARL/HRED) has identified several critical gaps that must be addressed in order to effectively team the Soldier with ATR for the desired augmented Lethality. One of these areas pertains to the way in which ATR is displayed and requires a thorough understanding and leveraging of relevant cognitive processes that will enable use of this technology. Additionally, insufficient consideration of perceptual, attentional, and cognitive capabilities increases the risk of burdening the Soldier with excessive, unnecessary, or distracting representations of information, which may impede Lethality rather than augment it. HRED’s planned and ongoing research is intended to develop novel mechanisms through which Soldiers teamed with ATR will perform more adaptively and effectively than either the Soldier or the intelligent system could accomplish individually. Based on HRED’s significant expertise in the cognitive sciences, coupled with familiarity with the military-relevant domain spaces, the following initial recommendations for ATR information display requirements are made:1.ATR highlighting should leverage a non-binary display schema to continuously encode threat information (e.g., target class/identity, uncertainty, and prioritization).2.ATR highlighting should be integrated with the target itself instead of functioning as a discrete feature of the display (i.e., highlight the target rather than highlighting a region with the target inside).3.Information about threat certainty or classification confidence (which can also include priority) should be embedded into ATR highlighting.4.Yellow highlights may offer advantages for display5.Changing information (e.g., target certainty) should be accomplished through formation or modification of highlight gradients rather than sudden changes in the display.6.Human performance evaluations of ATR should consider the incorporation of changing threat states and contexts into scenarios for more relevant findings.7.Human performance evaluations of ATR should consider the incorporation of uncued (non-highlighted) targets and miscued targets (false identifications; e.g. ATR identifies non-threat as threat) for more relevant findings.