Research Note 84-29

DEVEiOPMENT O0: DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR USER/OPERATOR TRANSACTIONS

WIT71 BATTLEFIELD AUTOMATED SYSTEMS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

a Synectics Corporation

rIO ulaymond C. Sidorsky, Contracting Officer's Representative

Submitted by

Franklin L. Moses, Chief

BATTLEFIELD INFORMATION SYSTEMS TECHNICAL AREA

and

Jerrold M. Levine, Director

SYSTEMS RESEARCH LABORATORY

DTIC

Best Available Co [ISMAR 014

E

U. S. Army

. Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

= January 1984

rLJ ADroved for Public release; distribution unlimited.

This report, as submitted by the contractor, has been cleared for release to Defense Technical Information Center

(DTIC) to comply with regulatory requirements. It has been given no primary distribution other than to (TIC

I and will be available only through DTIC or other reference services such as the National Technical Information

S|2Service (NTIS). The vicws. op;niens, and/or findings contained in this report are those of the authorfsW and

should not be construed as an official CoepatmEtrii of the Army position, policy, or decision, unless so designated

by other official documentation.

A f4 09 9n Al
L___ýp OF

Resear - h Note 84-29 -- A.ITLE (and'subita.) ,STYEO EOTA'R0CVRD

rDt:,LOPM~NT OF DVSI!CN CUI Dr.LINrS ORU/pATR ResiM~h Note

TZAN~SACTIONS TJITH .BATTL "FIELD AUTOMATEDM SYST.MS: November l 9 79-December 1983

E P.CTIVE SUMM4ARY 7. PERFoRtMING, ORE. REPORT NUJMBER

7. AUTHOR(.) I. ~CONTRACT ORGRN UU~.

MDA903-82-C-0245

~ RGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMIENT. PROJECT. TASKC

AREA & WORK UNI1T wumBERS Syflectics Corporation

10400 Eaton Place 2Q263744,A793

Fairfax,_VA 22303--_______________

1: CONT ROLLING OPrICE NAMr AjJD Aoonrn. 12. REPORT DATE

US Army Research Institute fo'r th e January 1984

Behavioral and Social Sciences 13. NUMBER O F PAGES

5001. Eisenhower Ave., Alexandria V~k 72311 11B * MONITORiNG A1GENCY NWAME ADORESS~lI dliffetowv from ContfolliftJ Office) It. SECURITY CLASS, (.oVle thi e8000)

* Unclassified

- DCCL E. A S$I FI CA T ION/DOW G R ADI SCHEDULE

DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of Ole. A-Iofl)

fApproved foil 'publfc r~lease; di1;tribution unlimited

IL,. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the .bo*,.cr ew .n..d in Block 20, It diff.,.,it from. RePOPf)

SuPPLEME.NTARY NOTES

K*ICE.Y.VORDS (Coonive on. ,.vetoe* ide It ..v~erotoy An# loentily by &#*&A R..lame)

Battlefield automated systems Human-computer in~teraction

D~s~ion guidelines D esign criteria

-~Fs~tioalstandardization User/operator transactions

Soldier-machine interface

ABS~TRACT (Coufwo am owv,,.. aid& it ipcew~y mdtoeeg.tIpf Ity%1Ck nkinrbor)

thig document is an-execptive sut=&a.y of a p~roject to develop design guideithes frachieving 'more effective user transactions with hattlifiela automated systems Awr,ethodologv ihat has proved useful In derlvi'ng guidelinss for higher order

aspects of human-computer intaractioth is described. The method is based on a

comparative analysis of common or universal transactions associated with 1

jextrting data processing sy'stems. Th-a msthoiology, conceptual* framotwork and --~format of the guidelines developed during the course of this project appear'to provide a productive approach ,to Improving thte proc iss of 41 technological transf e

ý D cot-no. EO T O o OI OV.49 ItOSSOL ZTt UNCLASSIFIED

*StCUNI¶I CLAISIICLTION OF" T"IS PAGE - .. L...

------------
01 UNCLASSIFIED"A

Afdata from human factors researchir~s to other members of system oesign teams

involved in the design and development of battl~ield automated systems. In

"addition, the-concept of Behavioral Interoperability is propounded and discusse

Interoperability is'reogiized as an important.de~sign goal with respect to

various "physical/mechan:-l" components of automat-d- systems.. The work here

demonstrates that the conciapt can be productivelyi extanded to the behavioral'

domain.

1 •

V..:.°

I..

• . • . ..

'1ii UNCLASSIFIED
ijj

The Battlefield Information Systems Technical Area of the Army Research

Institute (ARI) is concerned with helping users and operators cope with the

.,I ever increasing complexity of the battlefield automated systems by which they

acquire, transmit, process, disseminate, and utilize information. Increased

system complexity increases demands imposed on the human interacting with

the machine. ARI's efforts in this area focus on human performance problems

related to interactions with command and control centers, and on issues of

system design and development. Research is addressed to such areas as usersystems, software S.oriented development, information management, staff operations and procedures, decision support, and systems integration and utilization.

An area of special concern in user-oriented systems is the improvement

of the user-machine interface. Lacking consistent design principles, current

practice results in a fragmented and unsystematic approach to system design,

especially where the user/operator-system interaction is concerned. Despite

numerous design efforts and the development of extensive system user information over several decades, this information remains widely scattered and

relatively undocumented except as it exists within and reflects a particular

system. The current effort is dedicated to the development of a comprehensive

set of human factors guidelines and evaluation criteria for the design of

user/operator transactions with battlefield automated systems. These guide- '1 lines and criteria are intended to assist proponents and managers of battle- field automated systems at each phase of system development to select the design features and operating procedures of the human-computer interface

S.. •which best match the requirements and capabilities of anticipated users/ j• -, operators.

Research in the area of user-oriented systems is conducted as an in-house

effort augmented through contracts with uniquely qualified organizations. The

present effort was conducted in collaboration with personnel from Synectics

Corporation under contrccts MDA903-80-C-0094 and MDA903-82-C-0245. The effort

is responsive to requirements of Army Project 2Q263744A793, Human Performance

"Effectiveness and Simulation, and to special requirements of the US Army

Combined Arms Combat Developments Activity (CACDA), Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

SNTIS GRA&I

1DIC TAB

% .0"•announced 0

"..* .. *, tI~ ** ; .

Sv CodOS

6iii

"tAr
.4,

-• (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)

_ . I 9 9 5 9I
DEVELOPMEO'DSGG~ S/f

TRANSACTION~S WITH BATTLEFIELD AUTOMATED SYSTEMS

BRIEF

Requirement:

To develop a methodology that provides a framework and -format.

for a comprehensiv6 set o~t'human' factors guidelines for the

design of use~r trans actions. with.b~attlefield..automated. systems

f~o ue y uman factor~s speicialists. and. system. proponent

managers and-developers.

Procedure:. *

To meet-.the requi~r~9 stated above,, a-three phase research

program was initiated. th'shse. Iwa'd--devoted to defining buman

factors requitements for battlefie-ld automated 'systems and*

establishing tL framework withir . whi 'ch guidelir~es could be

organized,: In.Phase 11, the techrilcal data* base, Vas fur~ther

developed through search of'the military and civyiian

-liter'ature related to user/operator transactions with auto-.

mated data pro~ces sing*systen~S *and 'a' pr'ototype -hand~book of

-guidelines was-.developedi When gu~.delines were available-.ifl

-the literature, they were rewor~deds :necesisarýy for consistency

of expression :and/or modified to conform to. the newly established f-ramework.- -othergidlnSee ,written. on.the bas3.l

of: project sti- e~rt~c1'~dl ýdb h e suits of =e

analytic activities durin'g.Pha~se I1,.

During Phase 111, the provisional guidelines were applIed to

the soldier/irachife. interfac~s of 11%o battlefield automated system

developmental:. programs, each at a different stage of-developmenlt. 2

* These application efforts-provided the' basis for *refinemenlt of the

format and methodology for'developirlg. such guideallins.'. Modif i-

'catibiis'were made to the g...annSfl they were repiiblished.

Findings

Guidelines-in the literature wereplentiful in the areas

of dat nr and error. hbandling. There was also substantial

information' on coIng and'display formlats. 2Frother* iopicSt

little or no information was availabie"S. Thuis,. approxinfately half

of the guidelines wer .e written by the p'roject staff.

Utilization of- Findi.ngs:'..

Th6.methodology,'conceptual f~ramewor-k and format of the guide**

li.nes developed. in the course, of .thii'projectappear to provide a

productive .apptoach to inproving the p'rocess of "technologicaL,-'

transfer" of data from ,human f actors researchers to other membezes

of system design teams of battlefield automated .system.s. The

development of an officially sanctioned set of guidelines will

require interaction and coordination between, many Army agencies.

This handbook will provide8 a Stimnulus for such* interaction. In the

mfeantime i-,Judicious a~pplicatiob of these uidelines will improve

the-effectiveness of the soldier/machin~e Interface of future system

and will promote- the behavioral interoperability of these.

systems, i~eo., increase the degree to which skills and knowledge can be transferred from onesystem to another.
=• " . .... :'". * .. .. i•: ",.... ... .. .~. .. .. ...--...... . _ , e . .. , . " -. ..-.- •.. . .

:i ndividual contributing, to this report* Include:

Army Re search" Institute:

- . R. Sidori.:

... Synectics Corporiiion:

J. Altman

* D. Dillard

R.. Ful•e.t6n.- S •. . .J. Gates ': .

P. Grima

: - "R. Parrish

S..unger.

"1, Smith

- 0. Towstopiata

W4.

"00

1°

iv

I, . .
hi

."TABLE. OF CONTENTS

SECTION ".J 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.. ... . •

-¶]., .. , The-Problem:. Battlefield Automated Systes * . ... .... . . .. 1

Soldier-Machine Interface (SHI) User/Operat•or Requirements... 1-1

The Solution. . ... . . . . . .1

Sobjectives.

The Approach. .... 1-1

Activities Overview . .. ... .. 1-

Analysis of Battlefield Automated S. . ........ .... 1-2

Phase 11 Prototype Handbook Development

O;ganizing Framework for Guidelines andCriteria... . .. 1-3

Results of Phase III Guidelines Validation. .......... 1-3

-Recommendations" for Subsequent Research and Development

Issues. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . ; . ... . .. .. 1-4

SECTION 2. ACTIVITIES, PRODUCTS, AND RESULTS.'2

dnrdcmo . ... .N .:SUT . . .. .. . . .. .2-

"The Need Addressed... ............ .. .. 21

The Proposed Solution * . ....... . ..... 2-2

Phase I Activities and Results., . . * 2

Phase I Activit .s and Results .... .......... .- 2. 6

Phase III ActiviLes and Results. . ............ . 2-8

R EFEECES. 2

mvi 8v :1

m .•

• . . . . . . .
List of Illustrations and Tables

F.igure 1. Sample Guidelines for Display Techniques . . . 2-9

Figure 2. Sample Guidelines for Graphic Displays . . 2-13

Table 1. Organizing Framework for the Survey of

-Battlefield Automated Systems . . ........ 2-4

Table 2. Guidelines Format ...... . ........... 2-5

viii
SECTION 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

THE PROBLEM: BATTLEFIELD AUTOMATED SYSTEMS

9 Decreasing soldier population

skill levels 

* Increasing data processing requirements

' Increasing datd processing sophistication

e Emerging technologies

SOLDIER-MACHINE INTERFACE (SMI) USER/OPERATOR REQUIREMENTS

* Reduce error rates

- Unburden input

- Reduce memory load

- Simplify procedures

e Reduce system throughput time

(7• - Reduce correction requirements

a "- Reduce off-line references

- Decrease number of transaction steps

0., Increase user/operator acceptance

- Reduce frustration

- Facilitate quicker results

- Reduce effort per transaction

THE SOLUTION

* Three phase effort

. * Guidance to designers

• • Design to human capabilities, not equipment capabilities

* Comprehensive q- of design guidelines and criteria

O.OJECTIVES

I * Reduce training requirements

• Enhance human performance in battlefield automated systems

S• * ~Human factors technology available to system proponents,

designers

* Performance criteria suited to application during system

development

"THE APPROACH

. Survey battlefield automated systems--obtain data on user/

operator transactions

i Identify problems and deficiencies in user/opti .tor transactions--a real world foundation on which to build

* Develop solutions to observed and anticipated problems:

'I - Prototype handbook of design guidelines and criteria

- Validate the guidelines against battlefield automated

systemg in different stages of development
ACTIVITIES OVERVIEW

* Phase I

- Survey Battlefield Automated Systems

- Build data base

- Review guidelines literature

- Establish guidelines structure

- Prepare preliminary guidelines

e Phase II

- Review human-computer literature

Review the Life Cycle System Management Model (LCSMM) to determine guideline needs at different stages of

development

- Develop Prototype Design Handbook for Combat and

Materiel Developers (the guidelines and criteria)

e Phase III

- Validate guidelines and critcria against two Battlefield

Automated Systems at different stages of design

- Obtain system developer reaction to guidelines and

criteria

- Conduct in-house review of guidelines and criteria

- Develop recommendations for revision of the cuidelines

"- Republish the Prototype Design Handbook for Combat and

Materiel Developers

ANALYSIS OF BATTLEFIELD AUTOMATED SYSTEMS

* Review of more than 60 systems

- Battlefield Automated Management Plan (BAMP)

- Army Battlefield Interface Coicept (ABIC) '79

* In-depth review of 12 systems:

- TACFIRE - DS4 Auto Run Book - IISS

- TOS? - Phoenix Auto Run Book - SDA (USMC)

- TCT - MAGIS (USMC) - BCS

- DLDED - ISIS (Rand) - DAS3

* Substantive analyses and reports on 5 systems:

- Tactical Fire Direction System (TACFIRE)

- Tactical Computer Terminal (TCT)

- Admin/Log Automated Systems

- Intnlligence Information Subsystem (IISS)

- DS4 Automatic Run Book

* Conclusions from initial analysis of Battlefield Automated

Systems:

- Increased user/operator training requirements

- Transfer of training difficulties for soldiers who

cross-train

- Increased cost of stocking spat? parts

- Increased maintenance training requirements

- Increased demands on people--stretching ,apaiilities.

especially under stress

1-2

*1

I
*.PHASE II PROTOTYPE HANDBOOK DEVELOPMENT . ORGANIZING FRAMEWORK FOA GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA

* 'e Control Methods

- Alphan.u~reric Control Methods - Graphics Control Methods

- HELPs

. Display"Te•hniques

SAlphanumeric Displays

- Graphics Displays

*-Selective Highlighting

4& Data. Entry :and handling

"- -Informaiion on Legal En.triei

- Unburdeninq of Input

.- Interrupts and Work Recovery

. Message Composition Aids

.CompositionAids for'Alphanumeric" Messages

. . " Composition Aids for Graphics Displays

• e Data Retrieval AssistanceQuery Method.

, .- - Query Stiucture

, Symbology. and Terminology -

-Symbol~s -and Symbol Sets'.

- Standard Terms .

- Abbreviations. and Codes

.31 - Full Language

Glossaries

Error Handling

- Error .Feedback

- Error Correction/Recovery

e. User/Operator Configurations.

RESULTS O' PHASE III GUIDELINES VALIDATION

* Application to two battlefield automated lsystems:

- Vehicle Integrate8 Defense System--Data Management

System (VIDS-DMS)

"Vetronics--App~ication of vehicle electronics to

-" fu~ure ground combat vehicles

Prototype "guidelines appropriate and useful at different

stages of •system design

",Prototype guidelines republished in ARI Technical Report 83-

- Format and structure consistency improved

- Index added

.11-
.• .L.. .... ... .. .. • . JW ... .. .. . . .. .. . C. . t

m•lJl .cr f. . j V•J•• . ? .•  AAU. • . n JŽo, .•i  ;, 

3⁄4|f

--i

" .• This Page Left Intentionally Blank

GI' ,

,." 

- _ , . ..

* "C

* 2*

S•--i.•J1-4

n

_. •% -."
SECTION 2. ACTIVITIES, PRODUCTS, AND RESULTS

Introduction

• This document contains a summary of activities and products of a three

phase effort to develop and -alidate guidelines and criteria for user/operator

transactions with US Army battlefield automated systems.

- •The Need Addressed

Automation of the battlefield, rather than reducing the human skills

required, imposes demands for different and higher order skills than the

more conventional battlefield. Personnel issues associated with development

of battlefield automated systems arise in three specific areas:

1. The Soldier-Machine Interface (SMI). Traditionally, the

system designer's attention has focused more on the machine

end of the system than on the human aspect and has counted

on the adaptability of the user/operator to compensate for

any design inadequacies. Too little attention to user/

operator skills and capabilities, compounded by the explosion of information which automation allows, have greatly I! .exaggerated SMI problems. Systematic attention to human

engineering features of the equipment and especially to

human factors features of the software interface could

t •.unburden the Soldier-Machine Interface.

2. Design Inconsistency. Independent development of battlefield automated systems fosters unique configurations and

, %procedures. The lack of coordination among system proponents and developers imp- es another dimension to the SMI

O • problem, that of learning new equipment and procedures

.*. when transferring from one system to another, and sometimes

even from one duty station to another within the same system.

A more consistent approach to system design could reduce -• this negative effect of prior experience.

3. Personnel Insufficiency. Despite predictions during early

phases of automation for reduced nurbers and levels of personnel, just the opposite has been true. Expanding availability and increasing complexity of new battlefield systems

X impose additional burdens on recruitment and training of

%

.t4
personnel. The ALuay faces a further compounding of the

problem: its skills pool has been contracting rather

than expanding. Human engineering design for ease of

operation and maintenance promises some help. Of equal,

if not greater need, however, is attention to design

which will allow greater numbers of less skilled per-

.onnel to competently perform as system users/operators.

The Proposed Solution

The Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI)

proposed a three phase effort to address the above problems. The effort was

to provide guidance for the design of Soldier-Machine interfaces which focus

on design to human capabilities rather than on design to equipment capabilities. Tie r .posed solution was to develop and validate a comprehensive set

of hut.ian factors guidelines and criteria for use by human factors specialists

and system proponents, managers, and developers in the design of user/operator

tran act±ons with battlpfield automated systems.

Phase Activities and Results

The objective of the first phase of the Guidelines Project was to build

a dafta base fron whicri to develrrn a preliminary set of guidelines and criteria for user/operator transactions with battlefield automated systems.

'The intent of this first stage o'? quidalines developmernt was to provide a

framework and preliminary data by which to eventaall, provide to the system

* design team the tools necpssary to capitalize on hui.ian capabilities and to

compensate for hunan limitations, thereby enhancing human performaoce and

facilitating coordination among pr-ponents and developers.

As an initial step, a survey was conducted of all battlefield automated

systems. The survey began with a review c' the Battlefield Automated Manage-

,* ment Plan (BAMP) and the Army Battlefield Interface Conceit (ABIC). This

documentation permitted review of mcre than 60 bittiefield automated systems,

but unfortunately, at a more reduced lev-l of data on human factors issues

than had been anticipated. Neither the BAMP nor the ABIC'79 provided substantiva data ca Luman factors issues of concern. In order to acquire the

= ..

"2-2
Zlevel of information deemed necessary to provide an adequate data base. for

,.,the guidelines/ detailed analyses were conducted of a series of systems.

-'Data were gathered~by -two principal methods: interv~iew of, subject matter

. experts and/or developer personnel and thorough rev~iew of available documenta-,

Stion to extract information about system* design features and operating

procedures that would affect user/operator interact-ion with the system.

"Twor techniques wiere developed throuth whicb to reeord .nd mnipulate the

"data. The Transaction Feature Analysis technique was devised for providin.g

six-step narrative description of a system 'design feature and its effect on

"system performance. AX comparable technique, Tra.nsaction Comnpatability

Malysis,.was An derived to present comparison of si'iilar design requirements

"either across systems or across different portions .of a single system.

D, u xring these analyses, a variety of structures was explored within

: which'to set forth the )design guidelines'. inspection of classiffcati9l

%'.chemis in the human:.f ctors literature revealed.a lack of consistencya

frequently a structure and/or language too psych~logically.0riefted for

r•eady application bym the intended users. of the hindbook. Accordingly, one

of the principal goals of Phase 1 was to develop a me.thod of data presents-

• tion that was more suitable 'to the needs.of the analysts and engineers"••

typically involved in :the process of system development and system engineering.

The Phase I effort culminated in A Final Report organized as follows:

. Volume 1: Executive Sum•nry

Volume I1: Technical Report

S . Volume III: In-depth Analyses of individual.Systems

A.. Tactical Fire Direction System (TACFI.RE)

: B. Tactical Computer Terminal I'CT)

4

C. Division Level Data Entry Device (DLDED)

D. Intelligence Information Subsystem (IISS)

* " . E. DS4 Automated Run Book

Volume IV: Provisional Guidelines and Criteria

Volume V: Background Literature

2-3

-P af * k
, - I. . # . .. t a °' - •. . . . - r 

" 1'.Table 1

'Orgafizing Framework for the Survey of

:Battlefield Automated :Systems

1. Control Methods

:1.1 Alphanumeric Control .Mothods

:1.2 Graphics Control Methods.

1.3 HELPs

"2. 'Display Techniques

"2.1 Alphanumeric Displays

•2.2 Graphics Displays • . 2;- 3 Selective Highlighting

3. Data Entry and Handling -.

.3.1 Information on Legal,.Entries

.3.2-Vnburdfnin!'of Input.

"3.3 Interrupts and-Work Recovery

4.: Message Composition Aids

-4.1- Composition Aids for :Alphanumeric Messages

.4.2 Composition.Aids for Graphics Displays

* 5. :Data Retrieval Assistance

.5.1 'Query Method

5.2 Query Structure

S6. Symbology and Terminology

6.1 Symbols and Symbol Sets

6.2 Standard Terms

6.3 Abbreviations and Codes

6.4 Full Language

6.5 Glossaries

7. Error Handling

7.1 Error Feedback

7.2 .Error Correction/Recovery

S. User/Operator Configurations

2-4
r•- . -•• v• ,-•-:-•w•. 4. . , r •. - 777.•-:• ,ii -• •.•..

"Table 2

Guidelines For-mat

X.X.l DFrINITION. Defines the category of guidelines

and criteria covered in th subsetio. on*

X.X.2 -APPLICATIONS. Describes te .situAtions-to which

guidelines and criteria in .te subsection apply.

Examples are provided to illustrate the

applications•

X.X.3 BENEFITS. Describes tbe way% in which utilization of the Suidelines5will'enhance system performance. Descriptions of: beMefits, interpreted

in terms of the .specific.sYýstem's characteristics, can be translated into evaluation crfteria.

X.X.4 METHODS. Describes specific methods for implementing the guidelines in'thei subsection.

" Examples are provided libei4!lY to clarify each

method.

- g X.X.5 RECOKMENDATIONS. Contains specific guidelines- --

:which apply across all methods in the subsection. Usually, the first r~commendation in

each subsection is a matrix of applications

,N versus methods, s•uggestinq .specific methods

to use for each application;-

X.X.6 ADVISORY COMMENTS. "COnt*in" specific guidelines,

. for each method in the subsoeztion.

2-5

"4
A.,

*- Phast Il Activities and Results

The.objectives of the second phase of the effort were to:

1. Develop the technical information required for fuller

generation of guidelines and t. :teria.

2. Develop a prototype handbook of guidelines and criteria

_ . _ •to address the problems and deficiencies in the soldiersystem interface of battlefield automated systems and on

informition developed in pursuit of the first objective.

A review of the literature (Parrish, Smith, Gates, and Munger, 19R1)

related to human-computer interaction conducted early in the second phase

demonstrated that much of what is presented in the literature is too general

to be of use to -system developers as specific design guidance. The most

--8 useful documents: were those published by Engel and Granda (1975), Ramsey et

al (1978), Smith: (1974, 1979, 1980), and Williges and Williges (1981). Each

"of these reports addresses human-computer guidelines directly, and each

provides specific guidelines in at least one area of user/operator

transactions.

C,-,, .'S

This second phase literature review yielded insights andconcepts that

extended and supplemented the preliminary literature search of the first

_ :phase of the study (Volume V of the Phase I Final Report). It provided little

additional material that could be directly expressed as guidelines, thereby

reinforcing the earlier conclusion that material relevant to the purposet of

the project are fragmented and more useful as indicators of what work needs

to be done than of information which directly contributes to the development

".,_ - . of guidelines and criteria.

During this second phase of the effort, the primary focus was on actual

development and presentation of the guidelines and criteria. A major and

early consideration in this effort was development of guidelines appropriate

to each stage of system development as defined by the Life Cycle System

Management Model (LCSMM). Initial planning for the prototype handbook,

therefore, envisioned a developmental stage orientation within the organizing

2-6

\I
framework presented in Tables 1 and 2. In the end, specific breakout of

. ,guidelines by stage of development was abandoned due to the following:

* 1. Much of the material in the early stages pections of a

design stage oriented handbook -would havei duplicated work

under another An contract (Sawyar', Fiorello, Kidd, and

S• Price, 1981) which produced a.human' factovi "principal

N product" concept for each stage of thie' LcSýM. Although not

directly stated as guidelines, at leasti.fbo early"design.

stage, the descriptions of the process'es for obtaihing - the principal products essentially-constitute a series of

recommendatioris or guidelines appropriaeii, .to that stage.

-. "., 2. For much of the other aspects of the gUdelines and criteria "'. "S presentations (e.9., definition,-appli.•" xon', materials

would basically replicate the .content prtsented for early design and merely inflate the prototype handbook.

For these reasons, the development -of juidelines .appropriate to.each stage of

. ", system development was abandoned pending the results of the third, or7alidation, phase of the project. .

The Protctyoe Design Handbook for Combat and Materiel Developers was

Spublished as Volume .1 of the Final Report of Phase 11 of the study.. (Volume

. I presents a discussion of the Phase 11 activities and products. -S'e-eoiume

III of this report, Section 4, for a full .list of publications which evolved

during the full study effort.) The handbook is 'grganized according to the

"... framework and discussion topics presentedin Tables. 1 and ;. An introduction

"to the handbook discusses sources of information-:for guidelines and provides

instruction to the user on its use. A few commen•ts of noteworthy characteristics of'the handbook are appropriate.

1. In developing the design guidelines within.the framework

outlined in Tables l and 2,.the first four:.topics-zof

Table 2 (Definition, Applications, Benefits, and Methods)

characterize the subtopics of Table 1, while the last two

topics (Recommendations and Advisory- Comments) provide

specific guidance for selecting and then. implementing appropriate design techniques.

2. in developing the specific guidelines presented within

Recommendations and Advisory Comoents from the literature

inconsistency of language was a major problem. The majority

of the guidelines derived fr= the literature were reworded

or entirely rewritten to achieve consistency in style, to

-- . provide greater emphasis, ;o sharpen their focus, to remove

*, * ." psychological jargon, or to increase theix clarity of

expression.

2-7
3. As noted earlier, many of the guidelines topics were

addressed only generally or very sparsely in the literature-. For these areas, guidelines were developed on the

"basis f the knowledge and experience of the project staff.

Guidelines for individual sections of the handbook were

prepared by different personnel and then reviewed by others,

with differences of opinion reduced through discussion. It

is judged that guidelines thus generated comprise about

half Of the content of the handbook.

4. Creation of guidelines from experience yields guidelines

which .are, as yet, neither supported nor challenged by the

results of research, and which inevitably reflect the prejudices of the project staff. Nonetheless, they reflect

application in human-computer interface development efforts

on whibh project personnel have worked and they also reflect

solutions devised for problems and deficiencies observed

* during, the analytical activities of the first phase of the

project.

Figure 1 piesents sample guidelines for Display Techniques. Figure 2

presents sample:guidelines for Graphics Displays.

* Phase III Activities and Results

The objectives of the third phase of the effort were to:

1. Demonstrate the applicability of the guidelines and criteria.

2. Obtain system developer reaction to the guidelines-.

3. Develop reconmendations for revision of the guidelines.

Two battlefield autbmated systems at different stages of development

were selected for application of the design guidelines and criteria contained

in the prototype handbook. Applications of the guidelines were addressed to:

1. The Vehicle Integrated Defense System - Data Management

System (VIDS-DMS), a self protection system under develop-

* ment by the US Army Dev~lopment and Readiness Command

(DARCOM), through the Concepts Laboratory at the Research

and Development Center of its Tank - Automotive Command

(TACOM). At the time of appIciation of the guidelines

to the VIDS-DMS, development plans called for the detign,

development, and test of a Feasibility Demonstration Model

which emphasized the data management aspects of the system.

Information was gained primarily through review of the

draft procurement specification land through discussion

'Draft Procurement Specification: Vehicle Integrated 6efense System - Data

Management System (VIDS-DMS). Warren, MI: US Army Tank - Automotive Command

Research and Development Center, July 1982. (R-3760-10279)

2-8

.4 ...

. -. **V * * *
SECTION 2. DISPLAY TECHNIQUES

Guidelines in this category specify methods for information presentation

which contribute to user/operator accuracy and efficiency in information prtsentastion and utilization. Speed, ease, and accuracy of comprehension are

important factors here. Display teschniques are considered within the following three categories:

.* '~1. Alphanum~eric Displays describes conditions and technique%~

appropraiate to generation of displays for alphanumeric data

presentation.

~¶2. Graphics Displays describs conditions under which pictorial

and diagrammatic presentation of information ar* appropriate

and delineate techniques for achieving optixmur presuntation.

3. Sele,:tivt Highlighting describes techniques fo;: differentiatinq

displayed items which are of special interest to the uaer/

ar of :ýco,ýLtxstý

opertorfro ths hich ore mre routine.

,.-.j~ 22 A, 

2.1.1 TEFINITIO'U

Alphanueric displays aor screen or hard-copy presentations of informatncom;posed of thrute ophanur/c symbol sets. (Sea the discussion of symoaolo and

-i:* "''smbol s ets in Section 6.1.) To the extent that grammatical symbols are

required for textual separation, or that special symbols associated with a

specific area ecience of or tectnology are required. fixed alphanueric displays also contain thes additional syebols and symbol asts.

%I

ON.

Figure 1. Sample Guidelines for Display Techniques

•<i3.See=•e igl~q~i• elc~bs echiqefo: dffren2-in
2.1.2 APPLICATIONS FOR ALPHANUMERIC DISPLAYS

Alphanumeric displays are appropriate for:

a. Presentation of layouts for data entry.

EXAMPLE: In a field artillery system, all information is

entered within a selected prestructured message format.

The format consists of data field labels, data field

* del Laiters (made up of grammatical symbols), and spaces

for data element entry. All entries are alphanumeric

I. codes. Data entry length can not exceed the space allowed,

...........and only proper information (legal entries) can be entered

thin a given data fj

of data

__-'--ne" to "emergency."

c. Divsplay of a list of performance or other options (menu).

* EXAMPLE: A tactical intelligence data handling system functions,

in part, through user/operator call-up of preformatted displays

and, in part, through the us* of menus. once the user/operator

S logs onto the system, a list of the machine's functions--a

matrmn-i uomtclypeetdantesre.Slc

tino ucinfo h mse eursls nsm

V 2.1.3 BENEFITS OF ALPHANUMKERIC DISPLAYS

Proper utilization of alphanumeric displays will enhance overall system

performance through improved user/operator performance byz

a. Wtucing error rotes, by sinimalaingi

1. The necessity for recalling inforieauon from meimory due

to insufficient display of essential information.

2. Suboptirtum display format* which make discrimination&

A between separate items of information difficult.

3.Improper retrieval of essential information due to

xn~ppropriatt =de Lad/or features of information

prst0to

4. Difficuilty in' distinguisaing among loqic-l subelements

of a data item vhxich is required for subsequent ccwmand or data item entry.

b. Increasino syttem throighpnjt rates. by miniaiuingi

1. Diffic-ulty in locatiNg information displayed on the

screen.

Figuire 1. (continued)

2-10
2.1.4 METHODS FOR ALPHANUJMERIC DISPLAYS

~ * Alphanumeric displays are of two basic types: fixed and variable.

a. Fixed alphanumeric displays. Fixed alphanumeric displays cannot be varied by the user/operlator in shape, usie, or data

element label. Fixed alphanumeric displays can be provided

* through the f'-)llowing motholds:

1. Lists of appropriate information. These lists can take

any of a variety of forms.

(a) Lists may be in the form of legal codes as follows,

for exaz4ple, for inwmuition type:

(b) Lists may be in the form of code definitions, as

follows, for mu uition type -codes;

g ~2.1.5 RECOMMlENDATIONS FOR ALPHANUMERIC DISPLAYS

a. Table 2.1-1, Method of Alphanumeric Display by Ap;iication,

e1ýdiasents qeneral rt ndat~ji:Insi for t eof particular ~* f * d by thea

Table 2.1-1. Method of Alphanumric Display by Application

% MATlaA ItA 0

N.1

3.i4 Sol dU~I~ to quo A 

% MW A- ý

*~~~M TIeTha, WOW.i

19 lt"I tv W0 1 1

r 1. (otiud 4i 

J** 2-1
2.1.6 ADVISORY COMMENTS FOR ALPHANUMUEIC DISPLAYS

a. Fixed alphanumerie displays

1. Build fixed formats for alphanumeric data in accordance

with the source data. Allow space for the longest legal

entry; if grouping of data elements is required, make the

groupings agree with those of the source data. Do not

vary formats for identical d&ta element structures.

2. Give each dislay frame a unique identifier, i.e., a name

"or a number. When multiple frames are necessary to corplete a display, give each display frame an identifier

which shows how that frame fits into the total picture.

EXAMPLE: PE)tS LIST, FRAME 1 OF 4

3. Identify all fixed fields with a field label. Even fre-

"quently used fields having a standard format need a field

label.

EXAMPLE: DATE:../.. (for month, day, year.)

4. Left justify text and other alphanueric formatted data,

Right justify numerical/tabular data. Do not require

leading zeros in numerical data except where needed for

preci sion.

EXAMPLE: USE Do NOT USE

NUMBER Or TANKS: _ 17 000017

NUMBER Oi SOLDX.otSi 66 000066

RATIO: SOLDIERS TO TANKS. : 3.882 03.882

S;,

RATIO: TANKS TO SOLDIEPS: 1 .258 000.250

5. Design the fixed format for data input to match the output -- unless such requirements im•-at difficulty or overburdening

on the us,-r/opratox.

6. When providing on-line HEL.S and/or error Passeaes. vrvsent

them each in a consiste-.r !'iret and at a cosistent location on the screen.

7. make KELps and error aessaqps clair, concie, and selfcontained. That is. provide &ll "tcsssary irformation for

helping in the data entry or corrtctiri without seading

the user/oeratozr to external data sources.

S. Ma~ke o ue ••ter in ItL~s and error messages consistent

Figure 1. (Continued)

2-12
% ~4.2.2. APPLICATIONS FOR COMPOSITION AIDS FOR GRAPHICS DISPLAYS

Composition aids for graphics displays are appropriate for user/operator

* .use in:

a. Creation of maps and charts.

EXAM4PLE: The tank battalion commiander requests that oeof .the

forw.ard tanks provide a description of the terrain ximiediately.

ahead. The user/operator in the ]*ad tank creates a rough'map

of the area by sketching with a lilhtý pen and calling u~p

~ standard mapping symbols already stored in the machine and

placing them at appropriate' locations'on, the map. Alph&ý;umeric

identifiers are also added to call out important terrain featuxres. The display is then transmitted to the tank battalion

coummander.

~IPAVED 110A

~.AMR

~0AIL NOS

04-

-. 4.?.ý RELMMVENDAIIONS FOR COMPOSITION AIDS FOR GRAPHICS DISPLAYS

a . Table 4.2-1 presents reccarsendationsfor using particular met~hods I; for aiding the user/operator in composition of graphics displays-.

Before deciding to use one or more of, 'these **tnods, review the

general recomm~endations that follow and consult the advisory

9% coaenta on specific methods contained in Section 4.2.6.

Table 4.2-1. methods for Aiding Grsphir-e Display Composition

by Type Of Format Applicationl

ýN .

A-01 WO00 P.AL

~~:11ilUlpt bcA&( I"MIRfTF11. 1

Figure 1. (Continued)

2-13

.9. *K.~ -V?

V* *'**..
*"with personnel at TACOM with responsibility for VIDS

development.

- 2. Vetronics, the Army's concept of vehicle electronics, which

is the application of electronics ttichnology"to future

ground combat vehicles analogous to:the aviation community's Avionics concept.. Vetronics information was restricted to

- , broad conceptualizations of :functi'ons/applications presented

* in two briefings. Discussion was also. held'with persons at

TACOM having responsibility fo. fUrther, development. of

Vetronics concepts.

The guidelines were applied against se-lected functions of both the VIDSDMS and Vetronic$. Because of the relativeistages of development of the two

systems, the two applications, afforded-ve.y different contexts for guidelines

usage. For both systems it was possible to'pxovide both general and very

specific guida•ce to the system developer[:;, is can be seen in the substantive

"reports. provided in ARI Research Note 83-: . The Vetronic-sreport is. pre-

"" santed in S~ction 1 and the VIDS.-D.MS report-is presented in Section 2 of

this report.,with respect to the: applicability of the guidelines to the two

systems" the f ormat and content of the guideiines are conducive to their use

at different stages of development. At very early stages, review of the

Methods and Relcommendations sections in particular provid-good-.indications

for general appropriate designstolutions. ."As development progresses., the

more detailed information specific to design options presented as Advisor,

- Comments becomes appropriate. More detail-d :analyses and results of applicattions of the guidelines and retcommendationg.'for-their further: improvement are

presented in the next, subsection of. this section of the report.:'

In addition to the application of and:.developet reaction to the guide-

- lines, an in-house review by the project staff and others was carried out to

address ways in which the guidelines could Se4. ii.proved. With the exception of

primarily modest modifications which have been made to the guidtlines, results

'.4A' of these reviews are also reflected in'.the next subsection of this report.

""iTe Prmored Combat Vehicle Technology ConceDt Plan, presented by the US Army'

Tank -, Automotive Corn~and (TACOM) to the Armored Combat Vehicle Science and

Technology Program Advisory Council, 11 February 1982 and the Vetronics Acti(

- Team (VAT) Briefing, presented to the Program Advisory Council for the Tank

Science .,nd Technology Base Program by the VAT Chairman, 11 February 1983.

2-14
REFERENCES

E Engel, S. R., and Granda, R. E. Guidelines for han/Display Interface

* - (Technical Report TR 00.2720). Poughkeepsie, NeV York.: IBM Poughkeepsie'

-Laboratory, December 1975.

." Parrish, R. N., Smith, L. T., Gates, J. L., and Aunger, S. J. Development of

""Design Guidelines and Criteria for User/Operator 'Transactions with Battlefield

Automated Systems: Phase II Interim Report. :esearch Issues in User/Operatoe

' Transactions: Review of the Literature. Fairfax, Virginia: Synectics

-~ Corporation, August 1981. .4

Ramsey, H. R., Atwood, M. E., and Kirshbaumx P.. J. A Critically Annotated

Bibliography of the Literature of Human 'a'ctors in Computer systems.

Englewood, California: Science Applications, Inc., 1978. -

V ! Sawyer, C. R., Fiorello, M., Kidd, J. S., and :Price, H. E. M-easuring and

Enhancing the Contribution of Human Factors in Military System Development:

L Case Studies of the Application of Impact Assessment Methodologies. .Falls

Church, Virginia: BioTechnology, Inc., July 1981.. . .

Smith, S. L. Guidelines for Man-Computer Interaction in Communication Systems

•: ['" (Technical Report MTR-2913). Bedford, Massachusetts: Mitre Corporation, 1974.

-. -. Smith, S. L. Requirements Definition and Design Guidelines for the Man-

"Machine Interface in C" System Acquisition (TeChnical Report MTR-3888).

Bedford, Massachusetts: Mitre Corporation, 31 December 1979.

- Smith, S. L. Man-machine Interface (MMI) Requirements Definition and Design

.*N Guidelines: A Progress Report (Technical Repor. MTR-8134). -Bedford,

Massachusetts: Mitre Corporation, 30 September;1980.

-- • *. Williges, B. H.,. and Williges, R. D. User Considerations in Computer Based

Information Systems. Blacksburg, Virginia: Virginia Polytechnical Institute

- 'and State University, 1981.

* .t•: i

i A .

2-4 15