Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Björn JE Johansson, Charlotte Hellgren,
Per-Anders Oskarsson, and Jonathan Svensson
bjorn.j.e.johansson@foi.se
Swedish Def...
Background (i)
Background (ii)
Background (iii)
Research questions (i)
• How precisely can people remember and
accurately indicate the direction (by pointing) to
five dif...
Research questions (ii)
• To what degree are people supported by state of
the art technology such as digital maps, GPS
and...
Research questions (iii)
• Are there adverse effects, for example time
needed to complete a task like indicating
direction...
Research questions (iv)
• What type of spatial test (self-rating, spatial
visualization or spatial orientation) is the bes...
Design (i)
• Experimental task – navigate a route with three stations,
• At the start – presentation of five objects
• At ...
Design (ii)
• 16 persons (8 women and 8 men) between the
ages 19-42 (mean age 25.4) years participated.
• Within groups de...
Design (iii)
• A GPS-receiver with an electronic compass and a digital map
(Garmin GPSmap 62stc with the map database “Fri...
Design (iv)
• Before the test began, the participants
completed three different spatial tests:
– Santa Barbara Sense of Di...
Design (v)
• Measures
– Precision of indication task (deviation in degrees from
correct direction)
– Performance time of p...
Results (i)
Start Stn 1 Stn 2 Stn 3
Sample points
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Deviation(degrees)
Without GPS
With GPS
Error Bar...
Results (ii)
Correlation between performance on the perspective taking test and
precision on the indication task – measure...
Results (iii)
Without GPS With GPS
GPS-condition
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Deviation(degrees)
High spatial performance
Low spati...
Results (iv)
Without GPS With GPS
GPS-condition
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Performancetime(s)
Performance time for indication of d...
Results (v)
Ratings of mental workload of navigating to stations, remembering object
locations, and estimating directions,...
Summary Results
• Indication of direction” – significantly higher
precision with GPS.
• Performance time – significantly l...
Conclusions (i)
• To keep a reasonable stable and adequate level
of spatial awareness in terms of being able to
indicate d...
Conclusions (ii)
• Having a technical aid during indication of
direction decreased the mental workload
associated with the...
Conclusion (iii)
• Using GPS-support demanded significantly more
time to perform the task of indicating direction.
Conclusion (iv)
• The perspective taking test may be used as a
tool for assessing spatial ability for these types
of probl...
Questions
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Supporting situation awareness on the move - the role of technology for spatial orientation in the field

38

Published on

Presentation of Björn JE Johansson, Charlotte Hellgren, Per-Anders Oskarsson and Jonathan Svensson on the topic "Supporting situation awareness on the move - the role of technology for spatial orientation in the field" at ISCRAM2013

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
38
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Transcript of "Supporting situation awareness on the move - the role of technology for spatial orientation in the field"

  1. 1. Björn JE Johansson, Charlotte Hellgren, Per-Anders Oskarsson, and Jonathan Svensson bjorn.j.e.johansson@foi.se Swedish Defence Research Agency Supporting situation awareness on the move - the role of technology for spatial orientation in the field
  2. 2. Background (i)
  3. 3. Background (ii)
  4. 4. Background (iii)
  5. 5. Research questions (i) • How precisely can people remember and accurately indicate the direction (by pointing) to five different objects beyond visible range while traversing in wooded terrain?
  6. 6. Research questions (ii) • To what degree are people supported by state of the art technology such as digital maps, GPS and electronic compass when indicating the direction to five different objects while traversing in wooded terrain?
  7. 7. Research questions (iii) • Are there adverse effects, for example time needed to complete a task like indicating directions to objects beyond visible range, when using technologies such as digital maps, GPS and electronic compass?
  8. 8. Research questions (iv) • What type of spatial test (self-rating, spatial visualization or spatial orientation) is the best predictor of success in terms of how accurately people can indicate the direction to five different objects beyond visible range while traversing in wooded terrain?
  9. 9. Design (i) • Experimental task – navigate a route with three stations, • At the start – presentation of five objects • At each station – indicating the direction to the five objects. • Two conditions: – With GPS – Without GPS
  10. 10. Design (ii) • 16 persons (8 women and 8 men) between the ages 19-42 (mean age 25.4) years participated. • Within groups design – Order balanced over conditions
  11. 11. Design (iii) • A GPS-receiver with an electronic compass and a digital map (Garmin GPSmap 62stc with the map database “Friluftskartan PRO v2) was used for navigation. • A Pocket Laser Range Finder (PLRF 15C from Vextronix AG) was used for indication of direction when the pointing task was performed. It was mounted on a tripod (Manfrotto 190B). The accuracy of the PLRF device is ±4°.
  12. 12. Design (iv) • Before the test began, the participants completed three different spatial tests: – Santa Barbara Sense of Direction – Paper folding test – Perspective taking test Ekstrom, French & Hartman (1979) Kozhevnikov & Hegarty (2001)
  13. 13. Design (v) • Measures – Precision of indication task (deviation in degrees from correct direction) – Performance time of pointing task – Ratings of mental workload (1=Low – 7=High) – Results on spatial tests
  14. 14. Results (i) Start Stn 1 Stn 2 Stn 3 Sample points 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 Deviation(degrees) Without GPS With GPS Error Bars ±1 SE Precision on the indication task – measured as deviation from correct direction • Main effect of GPS- condition (p < .001) • Main effect of Sample Points (p < .001) • Significant interaction between GPS-condition and Sample Points (p < .001)
  15. 15. Results (ii) Correlation between performance on the perspective taking test and precision on the indication task – measured as deviation from correct direction r = .64 R2 = .41
  16. 16. Results (iii) Without GPS With GPS GPS-condition 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Deviation(degrees) High spatial performance Low spatial performance Error Bars ±1 SE Precision on the indication task – measured as deviation from correct direction. Participants with high and low spatial performance separately. • Significant interaction between Spatial Test and GPS-condition (p = .031) • Post hoc: High spatial performance –> higher precision without GPS (p = .037)
  17. 17. Results (iv) Without GPS With GPS GPS-condition 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 Performancetime(s) Performance time for indication of direction Error Bars ±1 SE • Significantly longer performance time with GPS (p < .001)
  18. 18. Results (v) Ratings of mental workload of navigating to stations, remembering object locations, and estimating directions, and physical demands (1=Low – 7=High) • Significant main effect of • GPS-condition (p = .002) • Significant main effect of Type of Demand (p = .001) • Significant interaction between GPS-condition and type of demand (p < .001)
  19. 19. Summary Results • Indication of direction” – significantly higher precision with GPS. • Performance time – significantly longer with GPS. • The Perspective taking test – significant correlation with performance without GPS. • Mental workload – ratings generally lower with GPS.
  20. 20. Conclusions (i) • To keep a reasonable stable and adequate level of spatial awareness in terms of being able to indicate direction to several objects while traversing, a technical aid like a GPS is clearly needed.
  21. 21. Conclusions (ii) • Having a technical aid during indication of direction decreased the mental workload associated with the indication task considerably
  22. 22. Conclusion (iii) • Using GPS-support demanded significantly more time to perform the task of indicating direction.
  23. 23. Conclusion (iv) • The perspective taking test may be used as a tool for assessing spatial ability for these types of problems.
  24. 24. Questions

×