TECHNICAL REPORT STANDARD TITLE PAGE 

I. 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No. 

FAA-AM-71-34 4. Title and Subtitle ALCOHOL AND DISORIENTATION-RELATED 5. Report Date 

RESPONSES. IV. EFFECTS OF DIFFERENT ALCOHOL July 1971 

DOSAGES AND DISPLAY ILLUMINATION ON TRACKING 6. Performing Organization Code 

PERFORMANCE DURING VESTIBULAR STIMULATION 7. Author's) Richard D. Gilson, Ph.D., 8. Performing Orgoni zation Report No. 

David J. Schroeder, Ph.D., William E. Collins, P'h.D., 

and Frederick E. Guedry. Jr •• Ph.D. 

9. Performing Organi zotion Nome and Address 10. Work Unit No. 

FAA Civil Aeromedical Institute 11. Contract or Grant No. 

P. o. Box 25082 

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73125 13. Type of Report and Period Covered 

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 

Office of Aviation Medicine OAM Report 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, s.w. 14. Sponsoring Agency Code 

Washington, D. c. 20590 

15. Supplementary Notes 

This research was performed under Task No. AM-A-71-PSY-27. 

16. Abstract 

A previous CAMI laboratory investigation showed that alcohol impairs the ability 

of men to suppress vestibular nystagmus while visually fixating on a cockpit 

instrument, thus degrading visual tracking performance (eye-hand coordination) 

during angular acceleration. Reduced display illumination, independently, has 

also been shown to degrade tracking performance during vestibular stimulation. 

The present study investigated the way in which low and moderate dosages of 

alcohol and two levels of instrument-display illumination combined to affect 

tracking performance (a) in a static (no motion) environment, and (b) in a dynamic 

(whole-body motion) environment. Mean blood alcohol as low as .027 per cent 

significantly decreased (p < .05) tracking performance during whole-body motion, 

yet caused little change in performance in a stationary environment. Impairment 

was much more pronounced with dim display lighting (0.1 ft-L) than with bright 

lighting (1.0 ft-L). These results suggest that serious problems may be 

encountered by the pilot who drinks even lightly and who considers flying, 

especially at night. 

17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement 

Alcohol Angular Acceleration Availability is unlimited. Document may 

Performance Vestibular be released to the National Technical 

Nystagmus Illumination Level Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 

22151, for sale to the public. 

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price 

Unclassified Unclassified 12 $3.00 

Form DOT F 1700.7 <s-s9l 
ALCOHOL AND DISORIENTATION-RELATED RESPONSES. IV. EFFECTS 

OF DIFFERENT ALCOHOL DOSAGES AND DISPLAY ILLUMINATION ON 

TRACKING PERFORMANCE DURING VESTIBULAR STIMULATION. 

I. Introduction 

Recently, effects of laboratory vestibular stimulation on the visibility of a cockpit instrument 

have been examined. 1 2 3 These effects have been 

of interest because eye movements induced by 

whole-body angular acceleration normally help 

to stabilize the position of the eye in relation to 

stationary objects, but they are inappropriate 

for viewing objects which are moving with the 

observer. In flight situations, the result can be 

blurring of vision in the cockpit and impairment 

of performance. 

A pilot can usually suppress these eye movements by fixation on an instrument. Evidence 

has been presented, however, that this suppressive 

ability is impaired after alcohol consumption 

and that compensatory tracking performance is 

affected. 2 Thus, although visibility of cockpit 

instruments and tracking performance may not 

be measurably degraded by some amounts of 

alcohol in static environments (absence of vestibular stimulation), they may be seriously impaired during dynamic flight environments. 

This problem may be even more severe at night 

since reduced display illumination recommended 

for night flying has been shown to increase the 

This study was conducted at the FAA's Civil Aeromedical Institute and was co-sponsored by the FAA, the 

Army (1J.S. Army Medical Hesearch and Development 

Command) and the Navy (USN Aerospace l\ledic:al Research Laboratory, Pensacola). Lt. Gilson is a Research 

Psychologist and Dr. Guedry is Head, Psychophysiology 

Division at USNAl\IRL; Dr. Schroeder is a Hesearch 

Psychologist and Dr. Collins is Chief of the Psychology 

Laboratory at CAl\II. The expert assistance of Carl 

:\Ioore in obtaining the blood samples, and of Elizabeth 

Gilson, Carlyn Manley, Cynthia Cochran, and Blair 

Fennell in the collection and scoring of the data are 

gratefully acknowledged. Gas chromatographic analyses 

of the blood samples were performed under contrad by 

Dr. Kurt Dubowski, University of Oklahoma Medical 

Center. 

1 

blurring and performance decrements that result 

from vestibular nystagmus.3 Moreover, there is 

the possibility that even relatively low dosages 

of alcohol are effective in producing these undesired consequences in dynamic environments. 

The present investigation was designed to 

study the way in which these two conditions, 

alcohol and low instrument illumination} combine to affect performance during vestibular 

stimulation. 

II. Method 

A. Subjects. Twenty-four male college students ranging in age from 21 to 30 years served 

as subjects. Each was a paid volunteer and none 

had had previous laboratory experience involving 

vestibular stimulation. 

B. Apparatus. The rotational device, recording techniques, eye-movement calibration procedures, and the tracking task have been described 

in detail previously. 2 The subject was seated 

upright in a small cockpit-enclosure mounted on 

a Stille-Werner RS-3 rotator with his horizontal 

semicircular canals approximately in the plane 

of rotation. The angular velocity of the device 

followed a triangular waveform and alternately 

reached a peak velocity of 120 deg/sec in the 

clockwise and counterclockwise directions. A 

complete cycle required 48 seconds. 

Lateral eye movements were recorded during 

vestibular stimulation by a conventional electrooculographic technique. Mean values of the 

nystagmic beats and the amount of slow phase 

eye velocity were measured at two sample 5-

second intervals for each trial and were chosen 

to include maximum nystagmus output in a 

single direction. 

A compensatory visual-tracking task provided 

the measure of visual performance. A sinusoidal 

"forcing function" deflected the vertical needle 

of an aircraft localizer/glide-slope indicator 
TABLE 1.-Means and standard deviations by session for slow phase nystagmus (deg/sec), frequency of nystagmus 

(beats/sec), and tracking error (arbitrary units). 

0. 1 ft. L Sessions 1. 0 ft. L Sessions 

Measure Group Con d. 

Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour 

Slow Phase Cont. Dyn. Mean 6.32 

Nystagmus SD 2.87 

Nystagmus Cont. Dyn. Mean 2.38 

Frequency SD 0.56 

Slow Phase Low Dyn. Mean 7.00 

Nystagmus Alco. SD 4.92 

Nystagmus Low Dyn. Mean 2.01 

Frequency Alco. SD 1. 07 

Slow Phase Mod. Dyn Mean 5.52 

Nystagmus Alco. SD 1. 69 

Nystagmus Mod. Dyn. Mean 2.27 

Frequency Alco. SD 0.55 

Tracking Cont. Stat. Mean 4.57 

Error SD 1. 24 

Cont. Dyn. Mean 6.90 

SD 1. 68 

Tracking Low Stat. Mean 5.18 

Error Alco. SD 1. 98 

Low Dyn. Mean 7.16 

Alco. SD 2.13 

Tracking Mod. Stat. Mean 5.39 

Error Alco. SD 1. 60 

Mod. Dyn. Mean 6.66 

Alco. SD 1. 27 

while the subject attempted to maintain the 

needle in the null position by manipulation of a 

control stick. Deviations of the needle were considered as errors and these were integrated over 

consecutive 1-second intervals. The values were 

then summed and an average value was obtained 

for each trial. 

Light was projected through a tube to localize 

on the display and to minimize reflection in the 

otherwise darkened room. Voltage across the 

3vDC light source was adjusted for a luminance 

of 1.0 ft-L (in a calibration procedure using a 

.MacBeth illuminometer). A second illumination 

4.84 3.59 3.21 7.06 5.19 3.39 3.59 

2.06 1. 68 1.11 3.24 2.31 1. 38 2.07 

2.14 1.71 1. 52 2.52 2.15 1. 59 1. 70 

0.80 0.63 0.25 0.56 0.54 0.62 0.57 

8.12 6.81 3.65 5.36 7.54 4.66 3.18 

4.87 4.55 2.04 3.06 3.73 3.07 1. 66 

2.60 2.09 1. 35 1.9 2.56 1. 64 1. 28 

1. 20 0.96 0.73 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.71 

15.35 11.09 6.46 5.85 12.46 10.25 6.39 

8.30 7.68 3.41 2.52 6.20 6.12 2.75 

3.10 3.00 2.30 2.25 3.16 3.00 2.44 

0.87 0.84 0. 74 0.68 0.93 0.78 0.73 

4.38 4.22 3.77 4.23 4.01 3.59 3.76 

1.07 0.51 0.81 1.05 1.17 0.58 0.84 

5.66 4.91 5.18 5.93 4.86 4.62 4.63 

1. 57 1. 52 1. 41 1. 83 1. 31 1. 03 1. 19 

4.27 3.84 3.17 4.75 4.30 3.56 3.01 

1. 83 1. 28 1. 74 1. 94 1. 77 1. 45 0.97 

7.22 6.19 5.00 5.36 5.52 4.72 3.88 

2.99 3.58 2.91 1. 53 1. 41 1. 79 1. 51 

5.02 4.60 3.81 5.06 4.93 4.48 3.67 

1.04 0. 70 0.65 1.73 1. 55 1.02 0.58 

10.99 8.27 6.23 6.12 7.89 6.01 4.85 

2.66 2.24 1. 27 1. 32 2.17 1. 53 0.99 

level of 0.1 ft-L was also used; this was produced 

by placing a 1.0 neutral density filter in front 

of the projected light source. Both levels of 

illumination are within a range recommended 

for aircraft instruments.4 

2 

C. Procedure. Prior to being tested, each 

subject was given five minutes of tracking practice with the rotational device stationary. He 

then underwent an experimental sequence consisting of four tracking sessions : a pre-drinking 

session and post-drinking sessions at 1, 2, and 4 

hours after a 30-minute drinking period had 

been completed. 
Each session consisted of 2.5 minutes of "static" 

tracking with the rotational device stationary, 

and 2.5 minutes of "dynamic" tracking with the 

device rotating. This was carried out with the 

two display illumination levels, one trial at 1.0 

ft-L and one trial at the 0.1 ft-L level. The 

order of presentation of these conditions (static 

or dynamic tracking and a bright or dim display 

illumination) was counterbalanced across subjects, and at least a 1-minute interval was allowed 

between tracking periods. Before each testing 

session, a venous blood sample vms drawn from 

those subjects receiving alcohol for analysis of 

blood alcohol by gas chromatography; only one 

blood sample was taken from each control subject. Eye-movement calibrations were obtained 

for each session. 

Three groups were used, each composed of 

eight subjects. Those in two groups received a 

mixture of 100-proof Smirnoff vodka and orange 

JUICe. Subjects in the "low alcohol" group received one ml of vodka per kilogram of body 

weight and those in the "moderate alcohol" group 

received two ml of vodka per kilogram of body 

weight. Subjects in the control group were 

given orange juice without vodka but with a 

few drops of rum extract added to impart an 

alcoholic taste. Subjects were separated by 

groups and were not informed concerning the 

amounts of alcohol they had received. 

III. Results 

The mean blood alcohol level for the moderate 

alcohol group was .077 per cent, slightly more 

than double the .027 per cent level for the low 

alcohol group at the one-hour testing session. 

After two hours, these blood alcohol levels were 

reduced to .076 per cent and .018 per cent, respectively ; after four hours they were further 

reduced to .041 per cent and .000 per cent, respectively (see Appendix A). 

Means and standard deviations for the slow 

phase and frequency measures of nystagmus 

during dynamic trials and for tracking error 

during both static and dynamic trials are presented in Table 1 for both conditions of display 

illumination. Figure 1 represents the measured 

samples of nystagmus as mean values of slow 

phase velocity in deg/sec and frequency in beats/ 

sec plotted for the two levels of illumination and 

separated by group. Both measures show essen3 

tially the same results: that nystagmus in light 

is disinhibited after consumption of alcohol. 

Subjects in both alcohol groups show a sizeable 

first-hour increase in the nystagmus measures 

from the pre-drinking level, whereas those in 

the control group show a decrease in nystagmus 

with repeated trials. The reduction of one log 

unit in display illumination was relatively ineffective in changing nystagmus, although the 

0.1 ft-L level is associated with somewhat greater 

nystagmus. Samples of tracings appear in 

Figure 2. (Nystagmus and performance scores 

for individual subjects appear in Appendix B-G.) 

The tracking results are shown in Figure 3 as 

the percentage increase or decrease in tracking 

error for the three post-drinking tests with respect to the pre-drinking error level. These are 

plotted for the three groups and the four testing 

conditions: tracking with or without vestibular 

stimulation (dynamic or static) and with a display illumination of either 0.1 or 1.0 ft-L (dim 

or bright). Results of statistical comparisons 

are in Tables 2 and 3. 

Tracking errors increased over the pre-drinking 

level only for the alcohol groups during dynamic 

tracking. Although this effect is more striking 

for those in the moderate alcohol group, it is 

apparent that those in the low alcohol group 

also exhibited the effect. (The difference between the low alcohol and the control group is 

significant at the .05 level for the first postdrinking test. See Table 3.) 

Also apparent is that the dim display illumination greatly increased the error rate during 

dynamic tracking. For the decrease of one log 

unit in luminance, the error rate increase was 

approximately doubled (see Figure 3). 

During static tracking, however, the alcohol 

groups did no worse than the controls; during 

most of the static testing they decreased their 

errors somewhat more quickly. This again was 

more apparent under dim illumination than 

bright. 

IV. Discussion 

The results show clearly, despite what appears 

to be for the control group a persistent practice 

effect, that alcohol ingestion significantly decreased performance during vestibular stimulation yet caused little change in static tracking 

performance. 
u 

LJ.J 

(/) 

....... 

(!) 

LJ.J 

0 

(/) 

:::> 

~ 

(!) 

<{ 

f-

(/) 

>-

z 

LJ.J 

(/) 

<{ 

:I: 

a.. 

3= 

0 

...J 

(/) 

u 

LJ.J 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

3.5 

~ 3.0 

(/) 

~ LJ.J 

CD 

(/) 

:::> 

~ 

(!) 

<{ 

f-

(/) 

>-

z 

u... 

0 

>-

u 

z 

LJ.J 

:::> 

0 

w 

a: 

u... 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

Pre 

MODERATE 

Pre 

16 

14 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

2 3 4 Hr. 

ALCOHOL 

3.5 

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

T 

2 3 4 Hr. 

16 

LEVEL OF ILLUMINATION 

14 o---o 1.0 FOOT LAMBERT 

-- 0.1 FOOT LAMBERT 

12 

10 

8 

6 

4 

2 

Pre 2 3 4Hr. Pre 2 3 4Hr. 

LOW ALCOHOL CONTROL 

3.5 

3.0 

2.5 

2.0 

1.5 

T 

Pre 2 3 4Hr. Pre 2 3 4 Hr. 

TIME AFTER DRINKING 

FIGURE 1. Frequency and slow phase velocity of nystagmus during angular acceleration for the control and alcohol 

groups. 

4 
Ct 

ALCOHOL SUBJECT: GE MODERATE ALCOHOL GROUP 

PRE n 

J lH 0 R . .....,__, L__. . ·\ "" -.....~ . ......_,___~.....--~~~~~,......------~~~ . ~ 1- U J l-1 --~~""'-.J--....~ .. ''~-·i'--J " ~~~-v"v>\ 

3-Sec 

SUBJECT: MG LOW ALCOHOL GROUP 

PRE Jl r--~~...__-~--.,.,_.;--~~ 

HOUR ·l ,__.._, ~~-~._,..___.,.,...~~~ ...J ·-

SUBJECT: WL CONTROL GROUP 

PRE -' .--.j I~ I ~~~~ 

I-HOUR ... 'i_-~~~ ~~~ 

15° 

INSTRUMENT DIAL ILLUMINATION LEVEL: 0.1 FOOT LAMBERT 

FIGURE 2.. Tracings of nystagmus from a subject in each of the three groups. Vertical bars through the tracings indicate the start of an acceleration 

cycle; a 15° eye-movement calibration precedes each strip of tracing. Note the lack of change from the Pre to the 1-hour session for the Control subject, 

and the successively greater Pre-to-1-hour session increases in nystagmus for the Low Alcohol and the Moderate Alcohol subjects. 
TABLE 2.-Results of t tests between pre-alcohol and each post-alcohol measure of the slow phase displacement and the 

frequency of nystagmus resulting from angular accelerations and of tracking error under static and dynamic conditions 

Level of 

Illumination 

0.1 ft. L 

1. 0 ft. L 

0.1 ft. L 

1.0 ft. L 

Group 

Moderate 

Low 

Control 

Moderate 

Low 

Control 

Moderate 

Low 

Control 

Moderate 

Low 

Control 

1-Hour 

-3.86** 

-1.27 

2.33 

4.06** 

-3.43* 

3.10* 

1. 06 

2.37* 

0.70 

0.38 

1.48 

0.95 

* p<. 05 **p <.01 ***p <. 001 

Nystagmus Comparisons: Pre vs. 

(Slow Phase) (Frequency) 

2-Hour 4-Hour 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour 

-2. 56* -1.36 -3. 73** -3.81** -0.55 

0.11 2.33 -2. 56* -0.35 3.01* 

4.33** 4.34** 1.06 3.90** 5.03** 

-3.08* -1.12 -4. 70** -4.09** -1.34 

1. 32 3.32* ~3.33* 1. 25 2.36* 

4.51** 3.55** 4.07** 5.32** 4.51** 

Tracking Error Comparisons: Pre vs. 

(Static) (Dynamic) 

1. 76 3.56** -5.23** -2.10 1.11 

3.16* 3.64** -0.12 0.99 2.91* 

1.01 3.28* 3.94** 7.31*** 4.07** 

0.93 2.63* -2.94* 0.18 3.43* 

3.99** 3.67** -0.44 1. 62 4.17** 

2.25 1. 57 3.68** 2.38 1.92 

TABLE 3.-Results oft tests comparing Control, Moderate Alcohol, and Low Alcohol subjects on measures of nystagmus 

and tracking error. Comparisons were made between difference scores for each session (i.e., the difference in scores 

of each post-ingestion session from those of the pre-ingestion session). 

Slow Phase Frequency 

Level of 

Illumination Comparison 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour 

C vs L -2.39* -1.40 0.15 -2. 57* -2.68* -0.37 

0.1 ft. L Cvs M -4.31*** -3. 67** -4.07*** -3.43** -5.42*** -4. 25*** 

M vsL 3.23** 2.08 2.68* 0.88 2.35* 2.84* 

Cvs L -4. 62*** -3.06** -1.09 -4. 73*** 2.46* -0.62 

1. 0 ft. L Cvs M -4. 88*** -4.91*** -3.68** -5. 99*** -6.64*** -4.40*** 

MvsL 2.54* 3.35** 3.34** 0.90 3.62** 2.71* 

Static Tracking Error Dynamic Tracking Error 

Cvs L 1. 54 1. 83 2.02 -2.31* -1.02 0.50 

0.1 ft. L Cvs M 0.42 0.78 1. 55 -6. 29*** -4. 42*** -2. 25* 

MvsL 1.03 0.90 0.61 4.51*** 2.08 2.06 

Cvs L 0.57 1. 32 2.26* -2. 67* -0.99 0.23 

1. 0 ft. L Cvs M -0.19 -0.08 1. 51 -4. 27*** -1.40 -0.03 

Mvs L 0.66 2.26* 0.48 2.31* 0.69 0.38 

*p<.05 **p <.01 ***p <. 001 

6 
80 • ~ CONTROL GROUP 

o-o LOW ALCOHOL GROUP 

60 ~ e---e MODERATE ALCOHOL GROUP 

40L STATIC DIM l I ~ DYNAMIC DIM 

a:: 20 

0 

0::: PRE ffi LEVEL 

(!) -20 

z 

~ 

u -40 

<{ 

a:: 

I- 80 

-4 z 

w 60 

(!) 

~ 40 l STATIC BRIGHT l DYNAMIC BRIGHT 

0 

I- 20 

z 

W PRE 

~ LEVEL 

w 

(L -20 

-40 

PRE I 2 3 4 Hr. PRE I 2 3 4 Hr. 

TIME AFTER DRINKING 

I!'IGURE 3. Changes in tracking performance for the control and alcohol groups under dim and bright illumination of the task instrument in static and dynamic (angular acceleration) conditions. The "Pre Level" (0) line represents the base level of tracking error during the pre-drinking trials. Tracking 

error scores for the four post-drinking sessions were converted to percentages of increase or decrease from the base level. 
A. Static Tracking. During static tracking, 

vestibular nystagmus was not present, and therefore there was no visual blurring or performance 

impairment from this source. The slightly faster 

improvement in static tracking performance 

across sessions by those given the low alcohol 

dose over the control group may have occurred 

because of awareness on the part of these subjects 

that they had actually received alcohol and a 

concomitant increase in their motivation to "prove 

they could do it." However, the only point at 

which there was any significant difference between the control and low alcohol groups in 

static tracking was during the 4-hour postdrinking session when there were no longer 

measurable quantities of alcohol present in the 

blood samples of the low alcohol subjects; as 

such, the static tracking differences may more 

closely reflect differences in eye-hand coordination abilities among the groups. 

B. Dynamic Tracking. These results confirm 

those reported in a previous study,2 which showed 

that the vestibular nystagmus evoked during 

dynamic tracking was not suppressed as well by 

subjects under the influence of moderate alcohol 

dosages. Thus, blurring of vision and the impairment of performance ensued. The present 

study indicates that these same effects are significant for average blood alcohol levels as low 

as .027 per cent. It should be noted that these 

latter alcohol levels were achieved with alcohol 

dosages equivalent to less than two social drinks 

for the average-sized man. 

C. Display Illumination. The effects of vestibular stimulation on tracking were much more 

pronounced during the dim display illumination. , 

Increased blurring and performance degradation 

with reduced illumination during dynamic tracking has previously been reported3 and the absence of a commensurate change in nystagmus 

was cited as evidence of a visual phenomenon. 

This phenomenon was magnified in the present 

study by the unsuppressed nystagmus due to 

alcohol. The combination of the dim illumination, vestibular stimulation, and the influence of 

alcohol produced the poorest tracking performance, whereas the control group, with greatly 

suppressed nystagmus, was not affected significantly by the illumination change at these relatively low angular velocities. 

D. Implications. The dramatic impairment in 

tracking performance only in the dynamic environment shows the insidious nature of this 

effect. A pilot who drinks lightly may be able 

to convince himself on the ground that his abilities are unimpaired and thus may feel safe to 

enter the cockpit. Results of this study suggest, 

however, that he is entering a potentially dangerous situation. If, while flying, particularly 

at night with dim display illumination, that 

pilot encounters vestibular stimulation as a result 

of maneuvers, turbulence, or some inner ear 

dysfunction, he may experience blurring of 

vision. The visual control of his eye movements 

will have been reduced by the alcohol and vestibular control is free to take over driving the 

eyes relative to the instruments. This increases 

the likelihood that he will misread the instruments and react incorrectly, causing more severe 

maneuvering and what may be the beginning of 

an irreversible, vicious circle. 

REFERENCES 

1. Benson, A. J., and F. E. Guedry: Comparison of 

tracking task performance and nystagmus during 

sinusoidal oscillation in yaw and pitch. NA~1RL-1123 

and USAARL No. 71-12. Pensacola, Fla.: Naval 

Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory, 1970. 

2. Collins, W. E., R. D. Gilson, D. J. Schroeder, and 

F. E. Guedry: Alcohol and disorientation-related responses. III. Effects of alcohol ingestion on tracking 

performance during angular acceleration. FAA 

8 

Office of Aviation Medicine Report No. FAA-Al\f71-20, 1971. 

3. Gilson, R. D., F. E. Guedry, and A. J. Benson: Influence of vestibular stimulation and display luminance 

on the performance of a compensatory tracking task, 

AEROSPACE ~fED I CINE, 41 :1231, 1970. 

4. l\Iorgan, C. T., .J. S. Cook, A. Chapanis, and M. W. 

Lund: Human Engineering, Guide to Equipment Design, New York, :\IcGraw-Hill, 1963. 
APPENDIX A-Blood alcohol levels in percent determined by gas chromatography for Alcohol and Control subjects. 

Control Group Low Alcohol Moderate Alcohol 

Session Session 

Subj. Pre Subj. Pre 1-Hr. 2-Hr. 4-Hr. Subj. Pre 1-Hr. 2-Hr. 4-Hr. 

JJ 0 MG 0 . 032 . 024 0 BT 0 .068 . 068 .037 

TL 0 BB 0 .028 .014 0 GE 0 .078 .086 .068 

JB1 0 RK 0 .012 .007 0 FS 0 .081 . 082 .046 

CH 0 LS 0 . 031 .023 0 VH 0 .084 .067 .036 

PS 0 FE 0 . 011 .012 0 LJ 0 .109 .102 .041 

DM 0 RF 0 .031 . 016 0 BS 0 • 071 .074 .032 

WL 0 CD 0 .043 .028 0 FG 0 . 053 .056 .029 

JBt 0 PD 0 . 028 . 017 0 .JM 0 .071 .071 .035 

Mean 0 Mean 0 . 027 . 018 0 Mean 0 .077 .076 .041 

SD 0 SD 0 .011 .007 0 SD 0 . 016 . 014 . 012 

APPENDIX B.-Control Group: Nystagmus measures from the angular accelerations based on two 5-sec samples from 

each session for each subject. 

Slow Phase Nystagmus (deg/sec) Frequency (beats/sec) 

Level of 

Illumination Subject Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour 

JJ 2.9 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.9 1.8 1.4 1.3 

TL 6.6 4.7 3.5 3.6 2.3 2.3 1.8 1.8 

JB1 6.7 8.1 4.6 3.4 2.6 3.1 2.7 1.6 

CH 7.7 4.5 4.2 4.4 2.9 1.3 1.5 1.7 

0.1 ft. L PS 10.7 7.0 4.2 3.5 3.2 3.4 2.0 1.4 

DM 4.7 3.1 2.5 2.6 2.3 1.7 1.8 1.5 

WL 8.9 6.0 6.4 4.7 2.4 2.3 2.0 1.8 

JBt 2.4 2.3 0.8 1.5 1.4 1.2 0.5 1.1 

Mean 6.32 4.84 3.59 3.21 2.38 2.14 1.71 1. 52 

SD 2.87 2.06 1. 68 1.11 0.56 0.80 0.63 0. 25 

JJ 4.7 2.8 2.9 1.7 2.0 1.5 1.4 1.0 

TL 5.3 5.1 3.2 2.6 2.6 1.9 2.1 1.9 

JB1 8.5 6.0 4.1 3.6 3.0 2.8 1.9 2.1 

CH 8.6 8.5 3.1 3.8 2.0 2.1 1.0 1.3 

1. 0 ft. L PS 13.0 7.9 5.1 4.0 3.6 3.0 2.1 1.8 

DM 3.8 3.3 3.1 3.5 2.4 2.2 2.3 2.2 

WL 8.9 5.7 4.9 8. 1 2.6 2.2 1.4 2.4 

JBt 3.7 2.2 0.7 1.4 2.0 1.5 0.5 0.9 

Mean 7.06 5.19 3.39 3.59 2.52 2.15 1. 59 1. 70 

SD 3.24 2.31 1. 38 2.07 0.56 0.54 0.62 0.57 

9 
APPENDIX C. -Low Alcohol Group: Nystagmus measures from the angular accelerations based on two 5-sec samples 

from each session for each subject. 

Slow Phase Nystagmus (deg/sec) Frequency (beats/sec) 

Level of 

Illumination Subject Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour 

MG 15.3 18.7 14.6 7.7 3.9 4.7 3.8 2.4 

BB 13.8 11. 1 5.6 2.6 2.8 3.2 1.8 1.1 

RK 3.8 4.1 13.1 3.2 0.9 1.1 1.9 0.7 

0.1 ft. L LS 6.6 5.8 3.9 2.4 1.7 1.8 1.7 0.9 

FE 3.0 4.0 2.9 3.4 1.2 1.3 0.8 1.2 

RF 5.6 8.5 6.4 4.7 2.5 3.4 3.0 2.1 

CD 2.0 7.0 2.7 0.8 0.8 2.8 1.3 0.4 

PD 5.9 5.8 5.3 4.4 2.3 2.5 2.4 2.0 

Mean 7.00 8.12 6.81 3.65 2.01 2.60 2.09 1. 35 

SD 4.92 4.87 4.55 2.04 1. 07 1. 20 0.96 0.73 

MG 11. 1 16.3 11.7 6.6 3.3 4.5 3.5 2.2 

BB 6.7 6.8 5.8 2.8 1.9 1.9 1.7 0.8 

RK 4.2 7.0 2.7 3.0 1.3 2.3 0.6 0.9 

1. 0 ft. L LS 6.3 5.9 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.4 1.3 1.0 

FE 2.2 5.3 3.0 0.6 1.0 1.8 0.9 0.3 

RF 5.5 7.0 4.4 3.6 2.2 3.0 2.0 1.7 

CD 1.1 4.1 2.3 2.5 0.3 1.4 0.7 1.0 

PD 5.8 7.9 4.4 3.5 2.4 3.2 2.4 2.3 

Mean 5.36 7.54 4.66 31.8 1.9 2.56 1. 64 1. 28 

SD 3.06 3.73 3.07 1. 66 0.99 0.99 0.99 0.71 

APPENDIX D.-Moderate Alcohol Group: Nystagmus measures from the angular accelerations based on two 5-sec samples 

from each session for each subject. 

Slow Phase Nystagmus (deg/sec) Frequency (beats/sec) 

Level of 

Illumination Subject Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour 

BT 3.8 7.9 6.3 2.5 1.7 2.9 2.6 2.0 

GE 4.3 19.8 8.7 6.3 2.0 2.4 2.6 2.5 

FS 7.1 18.8 19.0 8.4 2.2 3.7 4.0 2.5 

VH 5.0 19.3 8.3 6.4 2.7 3.7 3.4 3.0 

0.1 ft. L LJ 4.4 11.2 7.4 4.8 1.7 3.4 2.6 1.5 

BS 5.5 7.0 7.4 5.5 1.9 2.0 2.3 1.6 

FG 5.2 8.0 4.8 4.1 2.3 2.2 2.1 1.7 

JM 8.9 30.8 26.8 13.7 3.3 4.5 4.4 3.6 

Mean 5.52 15.35 11.09 6.46 2.27 3.10 3.00 2.30 

SD 1. 69 8.30 7.68 3.41 0.55 0.87 0.84 0. 74 

BT 3.7 7.0 7.9 3.4 1.5 2.4 2.7 1.8 

GE 4.4 2.6 3.1 3.0 3.1 

FS 7.0 14.3 13.4 7.6 2.3 4.3 3.8 2.8 

VH 4.6 11.4 7.4 3.6 1.8 2.8 3.0 2.4 

1. 0 ft. L LJ 5.5 7.8 5.7 6.2 2.3 3.4 3.1 2.4 

BS 4.9 11.1 8.0 6.3 1.9 2.6 2.2 2.1 

FG 5.1 5.9 4.7 4.5 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.3 

JM 11.6 24.2 23.7 11.8 3.7 4.7 4.3 3.6 

Mean 5.85 12.46 10.25 6.39 2.25 3.16 3.000 2.44 

SD 2.52 6.20 6.12 2.75 0.68 0.93 0.78 0.73 

10 
APPENDIX E.-Control group: Dynamic and Static tracking error in arbitrary units under bright and dim illumination 

conditions. 

Static Dynamic 

Level of 

Illumination Subject Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour 

JJ 4.98 4.05 3.80 3.22 6.96 4.67 3.86 4.25 

TL 5.35 4.64 4.09 4.65 7.16 5.68 5.76 5.13 

JB1 6.65 5.43 4.97 4.88 8.73 6.85 6.27 7.32 

0.1 ft. L CH 3.92 4.82 3.99 3.59 6.90 5.92 4.46 7.01 

PS 5.42 6.12 5.05 4.39 9.28 8.87 7.70 5.62 

DM 2.84 3.11 4.04 2.64 4. 70 4.51 3.37 3.44 

WL 3.75 3.57 4.17 3.83 7.01 4.64 4.31 4.71 

JBt 3.64 3.29 3.66 2.98 4.50 4.18 3.54 3.92 

Mean 4.57 4.38 4.22 3.77 6.90 5.66 4.91 5.18 

SD 1. 24 1. 07 0.51 0.81 1. 68 1. 57 1. 52 1. 41 

JJ 3.98 3.01 3.17 3.12 5.01 4.00 3.68 3.78 

TL 5.40 5.55 3.79 5.01 8.90 6.36 5.53 4.56 

JB1 4.70 4.65 3.91 3.72 7. 78 6.75 4.97 5.65 

1. 0 ft. L CH 4.34 4.76 4.62 4.28 4.60 4.64 6.24 6.50 

PS 5.72 4.54 3.83 3.59 7.39 5.97 5.33 4.56 

DM 2.94 2.12 2.76 2.77 4.61 3.38 3.60 3.20 

WL 4.01 4.50 3.55 4.71 5.29 3.94 4.10 5.53 

JBt 2.76 2.94 3.08 2.86 3.84 3.82 3.53 3.27 

Mean 4.23 4.01 3.59 3.76 5.93 4.86 4.62 4.63 

SD 1. 05 1. 17 0.58 0.84 1. 83 1. 31 1. 03 1. 19 

APPENDIX F.-Low Alcohol group: Dynamic and Static tracking error in arbitrary units under bright and dim 

illumination conditions. 

Static Dynamic 

Level of 

Illumination Subject Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour 

MG 8.68 6.60 5.54 4.43 11.28 12.06 9.34 7.90 

BB 5.45 3.23 2.50 2.21 7.46* 6.57 3.23 3.21 

RK 6.95 7.58 5.31 6.98 8.40 11.42 13.65 10.97 

0.1 ft. L LS 5.70 4.31 5.15 2.67 8.07 7.67 5.93 4.84 

FE 4.80 3.68 3.64 2.41 5.63 5.11 4.60 3.15 

RF 4.05 2.60 2.76 1. 65 5.99 5.04 3.97 3.22 

CD 2.69 2.93 2.93 2.55 4.44 4.22 3.49 3.25 

PD 3.15 3.23 2.86 2.44 6.00 5.63 5.33 3.43 

Mean 5.18 4.27 3.84 3.17 7.16 7.22 6.19 5.00 

SD 1. 98 1. 83 1. 28 1. 74 2.13 2.99 3.58 2.91 

MG 7.72 7.03 5.58 3.21 7.01 8.20 7.84 5.61 

BB 2.95 2.72 1. 82 2.27 4.48 4.48 3.31 2.46 

RK 7.10 6.67 5.80 5.09 7.50 6.27 7.10 6.49 

1. 0 ft. L LS 4.74 5.20 3.94* 3.34 5.71 6.66 4.75* 4.47 

FE 3.71 3.38 3.14 2.25 4.67 5.04 4.44 2.31 

RF 3.30 3.41 2.54 2.23 3.86 4.50 3.11 3.17 

CD 2.64 2.53 2.51 2.43 3.25 4.07 3.66 3.30 

PD 5.87 3.45 3.19 3.27 6.39 4.90 3.58 3.27 

Mean 4.75 4.30 3.56 3.01 5.36 5.52 4.72 3.88 

SD 1. 94 1. 77 1. 45 0.97 1. 53 1. 41 1. 79 1. 51 

*Approximate score due to recording problem. 

11 
APPENDIX G.-Moderate Alcohol group: Dynamic and static tracking error in arbitrary units under bright and dim 

illumination conditions. 

Static Dynamic 

Level of 

Illumination Subject Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour Pre 1-Hour 2-Hour 4-Hour 

BT 4.35 4.35 4.17 3.12 4.99 8.92 6.45 4. 71 

GE 5.52 3.97 4.78 3.82 7.44 14.17 10.29 7.12 

FS 3.65 3.85 3.80 3.14 4.46 8.91 8.45 4.49 

0.1 ft. L VH 6.63 6.53 5.24 4.73 7.23 12.48 8.95 6.59 

LJ 8.11 6.51 4.99 3.79 7.83 11. 18 8.25 5.90 

BS 6.26 5.01 4.37 4.43 7.52 7.13 6.36 5.56 

FG 3.40 4.66 3.76 3. 10 6.39 10.51 5.31 7.71 

JM 5.21 5.24 5.72 4.33 7.43 14.64 12.12 7.76 

Mean 5.39 5.02 4.60 3.81 6.66 10.99 8.27 6.23 

SD 1. 60 1. 04 0.70 0.65 1. 27 2.66 2.24 1. 27 

BT 3.51 3.19 4.15 3.14 4.29 5.72 6.57 3.61 

GE 2.58 3.90 3.88 3.15 4.42 7.97 6.87 5.43 

FS 4.18 3.90 3.38 3.00 6.15 7.01 4.86 3.63 

1. 0 ft. L VH 5.40 6.62 6.39 3.83 8.33 11.73 8.84 6.57 

LJ 8.01 7.43 3.99 3.53 6.80 9.23 5.37 5.05 

BS 4.53 4.20 4.50 3.90 5.89 6.26 4.85 4.28 

FG 6.01 4. 10 3.90 4. 70 6.77 5.58 4.05 5.25 

JM 6.30 6.07 5.64 4.09 6.34 9.63 6.67 4.96 

Mean 5.06 4.93 4.48 3.67 6.12 7.89 6.01 4.85 

SD 1. 73 1. 55 1. 02 0.58 1. 32 2.17 1. 53 0.99 

12