Techrnca) Paper 358 

AD

— EFFECTIVE TRAiNING FOR TARGET

IDENTIFICATION UNDER DEGRADED CONDITIONS

John T. Cockrell

MI FIELD UNIT AT FORT KNOX, KENTUCKY

>-

U. S. Army

Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

April 1979

Ap provi d for pub~

êc nh d ibutlon un himi(.d.
- - -

U. S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

A Field Operating A gency under the Jurisdiction of the

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

WILLI AM L. HAUSER

J OSEPH ZEIDNER Colonel, US Arm y

Technical Director Comman der

NOTICES

DISTRIBUTION: Primary distribution of thi s report his b.s n made by ARI. Pies.. sddress cOrre.pondsnc.

~~ncsrning distribution of reports to: U. S. Army Research instit ute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, ATTP4: PERI-P , 5001 Eisenhov,e r Avenu e, Alexindri ., Virginia 22333,

FINAL DISPOSITION: This report may be destroyed wisan it is no longor needed. Pi.a* do not return it to the U. S. Army Rsisarch Institut, for the Behavi

~qaI and Social Scs.ncss.

~~~ 

The findings in this report ar, not to be construed as an official D partme nt of the Army position, unless so designated by other authori,ed docum.nt~. 

~~

. .. ~~.
Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (ITha~ DMa Hnl.r.

~~

~E’~

” ‘ ‘

~ ‘‘ E ~~~~ “~“ ~ A 1

~E READ InsTR uctioNs i

~~ rur~ i uut..uas is u MS I.1I

~ U~~~~U BEFORE COMPLETING FORM I. _R~ rORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. )i’

~ R~~GIP1.BMX!c ‘

~~ “L C~ ‘~U~~~~-rt - -

~ Technical ~aper~~~58 

~~ 

fYJ ~~~— 1’I~~~ ~~~~~~-

~~~~~‘

4. TITLE (aid S..beStl.j S. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED

( f EFFECTIVE JRAINING FOR JARGET ~DEN~~~~j CATION / -- UNDER DEGRi.DED CONDITIONS ____________________________

/ 6. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

7. AUTHOR(.) 5. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(S)

( John T./coc~~~~tf --

~~ ~~~~~~RFORMING ORGANIZATION NAM E AND ADORESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT . PROJECT , TASK

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral ,: 

~

,

‘

)—

and Social Sciences (PERI-IK) .

!?~

/ 2Ql6l1~ lA9lB /

5001 Eisenhower Avenue , Alexandria , VA 22333

II. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAM E AND ADDRESS ~

t

~~~ffQ~ j,O~TG

Army Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

Washington , DC 20310 

22 14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADORESS(S( dUl.rsnl f,oa, Ccnfrotliná Olfic.) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (ol this ~.po rf )

~

2 ,

“ / Unclassified

—— / -.J IS.. DECLASSIFICATION/DO WNGRADING

/ SCHEDULE — —

IC. OISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (.1 thi. R.pari)

Approved for public release ; distribution unlimited.

17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (e~ A. ab.fract aiI.r.d in Slack 20, Ii dIU.,.nt from R.p ort)

IS. SUPPL EMENTARY NOTES

15. KEY WORDS (Caniinu. an r.v..a . aid. ii n.c...ay aid Idantily by block nim,b.r)

Target identification

Perceptual learning

Target identification training

Zt--.A U5T’BAC’r (Eaif~~ a — ,.,.c ~~~ ~ n.u y d ldsiMifr by block m b v)

j

~This experiment explored the relevance of the psychological concept of

overshadowing to military target identification training. The concept predicts tha t the most outstanding distinctive feature of a target will capture

~ 

.

~ the attention of the trainee , who will pay little attention to other features.

This prediction implies that soldiers will have a difficult time identifying

degraded targets unless specifically trained on degraded targets. The experimental procedure was to force attention on more and more features 

(continued

of the —

)

~~~~~~~~‘1, ~

.Q3 £DnIO.. oc’Nove$ ISOWOLETE 

U nclassified SECU BITY CLUSIP1CATSOS OP ThIS PAGE (

~~iai DMa Eni.,e~ • ‘

v

~

J/

—~~~~~~~ .—.—.-------— — — --- - -——- - ~~~~ , _ — —--,-
- -

-- -

Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(Wiiai Data Snfrr.d)

Item 20 (continued)

- 

~ targets by progressively covering the outstanding features. Results confirmed the relevance of overshadowing and suggested that most training

should concentrate on degraded views.

Psychologists interested in perception and in military target identification training are the intended audience for this 

rePort 

‘

I

~~~ ~t I)

~ 

T . . ~~~~~~~~~~~ 

~~~•/

A . .

~~Ll and/oi-

[

~~~ _________________

Unclassified

SECURITY CLASS IF ICATION OF 71415 PAGE(W’P,.n Data Ent...d)

—
Technical Paper 358

EFFECTIVE TRAINING FOR TARGET

IDENTIFI CATION UNDER DEGRADED CONDITIONS

~

John 1. Cockrell

Robert W. Bauer, Team Chief

Submitted by:

Donald F. Haggard, Chief

ARI FIELD UNIT AT FORT KNOX, KENTUCKY

Approved By:

A. H. Blrnbaum, Acting Director

ORGANIZATIONS AND SYSTEMS

RESEARCH LABORATORY

Joseph Zeidner

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR

U.S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

5001 Eisenhower Avenue. Alexandria, Virginia 22333

Office, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

Department of the Army

April 1979

Army Project Number Target 2Q1O1IO1A9IB Identificat ion

~~~~~~~~ fr p

~~fie pilsas; dISWIiBIIIOn UnII,IWd.

V T

T___ ________

-

~

____
ARI Research Reports and Technical Papers are intended for sponsors of

R&D tasks and other research and military agencies. Any findings ready for

implementation at the time of publication are presented in the latter part of

the Brief. Upon completion of a major phase of the task, formal recommendations for official action normally are conveyed to appropriate military

agencies by briefing or Disposition Form.

I

--
FOREWORD

The Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

(ARI) conducts research on ways to provide effective training and also

on gaining and processing reconnaissance and surveillance information.

This report presents results of an in—house laboratory independent research (ILIR) project, funded under Army Project 2Ql6llOlA9lB, on target identification training. Previous research findings on vision

and perceptual learning have been applied to military training in target identification , for instance as reported in ARI Technical Papers

209 and 301. This report explores the principles involved in using

degraded views for training and the practical effects of different

presentation methods. Work was done at the ARI Field Unit at Fort

Knox , Ky.

JO PH ZE R

echnical Director
EFFECTIVE TRAINING FOR TARGET IDENTIFICATION

UNDER DEGRADED CONDITIONS

BRIEF

1

1

Requirement:

To investigate the concept of overshadowing and the role it might play in target identification training. The concept of overshadowing holds that trainees pay attention to the most Obvious distinctive

feature of a particular target and pay little attention to less obvi- ous features. The dominant feature is said to overshadow the less obvious features.

Procedure:

The concept was investigated by training four groups of subjects to identify targets. Each group was trained on a different view of the same targets, with more and more of the distinctive features be- ing covered in order to force attention to the less obvious features. All groups were tested on the same 100%, 67%, and 35% views of the targets.

Findings:

Groups trained on partly concealed targets made the best final

scores, and groups trained entirely on completely visible targets made the worst scores on 35% visible targets. Results agree with the overshadowing concept and indicate that the best way for trainees to learn to identify degraded (difficult to see) targets is to train on degraded targets. Training on wide—open targets may waste time or

even be harmful; possibly all training should be concentrated on dif- ferent views of degraded targets.

Utilization of Findings:

Many other basic research findings in Vision and perceptual. learning may be pertinent to target identification training, and transition research should investigate the application of these re- search findings.

a.-- - - 

—
EFFECTIVE TRAINING FOR TARGET IDENTIFICATION

UNDER DEGRADED CONDITIONS

CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTIC ’

~ 1

METHOD 2

Overview 2

Subjects 3

Identification Slides 3

Experimental Room and Equipment 5

Procedure 6

RESULTS 7

DISCUSSION 14

SUMMARY AND C~NCLUSIONS 17

REFERENCES 19

DISTRIBUTION 21

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Significance levels for Mann-Whitney U Tests,

main experiment, Pests 2 and 3 14

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Mean number of correct responses for each group

during the warm-up phase 8

2. Mean number of correct responses on main

experiment training trials 10

3. Percent of subjects making perfect score on

main experiment tests 11

4. Percent of subjects making perfect score on

main experiment retests 12

- - -
CONTENTS (Continued)

Page

Figure 5. Mean number of correct responses on main

experiment tests 13

6. Percent of subjects making perfect score on

both main experiment test and retest 15

____________ - 
EFFECTIVE TRAININ G FOR TARGET IDENTIFICATI ON

UNDER DEGRADED CONDITI ONS

INTROD UCTION

Leibowitz (1967) has suggested to the military that certain basic

psychological research findings in vision and perception could be appl ied to military training in target identification . Based on his

analysis of the target identification process , Leibowitz recommended

the following changes in training procedure : (a) elimination of ver- A

bal descriptive materials , i.e., verbal descriptions of target features;

(b) much greater emphasis on frequency of exposure ; and (c) presentation of all possible degraded views of each target. Leibowitz argued

that perceptual learning is accomplished by perceiving, not by listening, and that tra ining on degraded views is necessary because many

targets in combat are degraded .

Cockrell (1970) confirmed the usefulness of the recommendations

in an experiment with photointerpreters: Verbal descriptions of target

features proved to be a waste of valuable training time ; and subjects

who were exposed to the most identification trials on degraded views

and who received prompt feedback learned the most.

The present study continues the above research . It seeks to explore some of the psychological principles involved in the use of degraded views in training and also to explore various training methods

for presenting the degraded views.

One such psychological principle that may be pertinent is the

concept of overshadowing . This concept has been explored by a number

of investigators , including Mackin tosh (1975) , Wagner (1969), Lovejoy

(1967), Dukes (1967) , Sutherland (1963), and Anderson (1958). Pavlov

(1927) gave the following definition of overshadowing : “The presence

of an equally relevant , more salient stimulus may decrease or completely

prevent conditioning to a less salient stimulus .” In target identif ication terminology , this mi ght be paraphrased as “an easily seen and

outstanding distinctive feature on a particular target will capture the

attention of the trainee , and little attention will be paid to the remaining features.”

In other words , if identification training is given on wide-open ,

nondegraded targets , we can expect trainees to learn the identif ications

based on the outstanding feature of each target and to ignore the other

features of the target. Mackintosh (1965) cites the “Law of Least

Effor t” as probably working in these situations . He says that the subjects will attend to whichever cue is correlated consistently with reward and provides the easiest predictor of reward

.1
The evidence seems to indicate that overshadowing does not produce

~n “all-or-none” effect , but rather produces a gradient effect similar

to a one-sided stimulus generaJ.ization gradient . Depending upon experimen tal condi tions the overshadowing gradient appears to be more

or less steep. Bruner (1955), for example , offers evidence that indicates the overshadowing gradient is steeper with a high drive state;

Sutherland’ s (1966) evidence indicates that the gradient is less steep

under partial reinforcement.

The combat soldier must be able to identify targets under all degraded condition s, and therefore the training problem is how to produce

a flat gradient . Wi th stimulus generalization , flat gradients are produced by providing discrimination training all along the continuum.

Such a procedure might be useful in target identification training .

METHOD

Overview

The many different types of target degradation in combat include

range , obstructed views, camouflage, dust , smoke , heat waves , glare ,

harsh shadows , and inadequate illumination . For the present experiment , the degradation chosen was obstructed views simply because the

experimental materials are easier to produce and the dimension can be

manipulated precisely. The essence of the experiment was to try to

force the trainees to pay attention to many dif ferent features on the

target other than the outstanding features. The most direct way to

accomplish this was to cover various parts of the target. Theoretically, each type of degradation should have much the same- effect. However , it may be necessary to study several types in order to confirm

this.

The subjects were 96 soldiers in various stages of initial training. They were trained by the usual method : Slides were projected on

a screen; each subject was required to respond ; and then the correct

identification was projected under the target on the screen. All of

the subjects in all groups learned to identify the same targets in the

same sequence and with the same number of trials.

The only difference among the experimental groups was the amount

of the target that could be seen. All of the targets were the same

color and size and had the same orientation , so the primary cue dimension was shape of the various features. The amount of the target visible for each group was as follows:

Group A. 100% visible throughout.

Group 8. 100% visible at first , then 67% visible.

Group C. 100% visible at first , then 67% visible , and then 33%

visible .

Group D. 33% visible throughout

.2
Af ter training, each group received three tests in a counterbalanced order. The tc~ ts were conducted in the same manner as the

training , except that ccrrect answers were not given. The targets

were the same as those used in the training but faced the opposite

direction. The visibility of the targets in the tests were as

follows:

Test 1. 100% qisible.

Test 2. 67% visible .

Test 3. 33% visible.

Prior to the main experiment , all subjects participated in a

warm—up experiment. This consisted of a few trials in which subjects

learned to identify a small numbe r of targets differing in color and

shape . All subjects received identical warm-up training and tests.

After warm —up training, two warm-up tests were administered. The

first test removed all color cues ; the second test removed all color

cues and 80% of the target area. The purposes of the warm-up experiment were (a ) to check on the equality of ability of the various

groups and (b) to familiarize the subjects with the procedure so they

would know what to expect in the tests.

Subjec ts

The subjects were soldiers who had just completed basic training

or who were in advanced individual training. They were assigned randomly to 4 groups of 24 each in batches of 3 to 5. Because of the

na ture of the procedure , all of the subjects in any o~ e natch necessarily were in the same group. The experiment was designed to run

five subjects at each session , but often the units requested to supply

the personnel failed to send the required number. The subjects were

not actually selected randomly by the units , but rather in a haphazard

manner. Since each batch of subjects often came from two or three different units , an d since different uni ts sent men each day , there is no

reason to believe that any selective bias was present . Analysis of the

composition of the experimental groups revealed that all groups consisted of seven or eight batches , and all groups were represented approximately equally by all categories of personnel.

Identification Slides

The slides used in the experiment were photographs of smal2 -

scale model vehicles (1.87). These models were photographed one at

a time in profile view with a brown kraft paper monochrome background .

All of the slides were in color , al though for the most part all of the

vehicles were che same color. The size of the projected images was

such that identification could be made comfortably at a distance of

5 to 20 feet. Enough duplicates of each slide were obtained that a

prearranged carousel of slides could be constructed for each

3

- ~~-~~~~~~~~~~~~ --- — _— --- -.-
experimental group and slides could be shown in a different sequence

i

~~ each trial. Each slide was numbered to correspond to a numner on

th~ answer sheet (any particular vehicle had a different number each

trial).

During the training phase , the correct answers were projected

aftc r a p~~~iod of 8 second s just beneath the remaining image of the

vehicle on the screen by means of a separate carousel of answer slides

and a separate projector. The same answer slides could be used for all

c~ pcrtmental groups, it was necessary to place a blank opaque slide

between each of the answer slides in order to remove each answer from

the screen without turning off the projector~ The answer slides themselves were opaque except for the lettering so that the projected

answers did not produce any degradation of the image.

The variations in the slides for the different groups and procedures were as follc ~ :

1. warm-up Training Slides. Four military armored vehicles each

painted a different color (tan , white , light gray , dark gray) were used

for this procedure . These slides were wide-open views with no

obstructions.

2. Warm-up Test 1 Slides. The same four armored vehicles were

painted with camouflage stripes. Care was taken W ‘jet each camouflage

stripe in the same relative positic~n on the vehicle so that colorwise ,

all vehicles looked alike . These vehicles were also facing in the

opposite direction from the training slides.

3. warm-up Test 2 Slides. These slides were the same as for test 1

except that the rear 80% of each vehicle was covered from view (the nose

of the vehicle plus the main gun could be seen).

4. Main Experiment Training Slides. Eight civilian vehicles

were used for the main experiment. These vehicles were scale models

of customized foreign and U.S. sports cars which are not seen on the

street. All the vehicles were painted a dull red so that they all appeared the same . Color slides of a profile view were made of the vehicles in the same manner as for the warm-up training slides. The

slides for each experimental group were prepared as follows:

• Group A (100%). The slides for this group were photographed

so that 100% of each vehicle could be seen.

• Group B ( 67%) . The slides for this group were photographed so

that the front 67% could be seen . This group started training

or Group A slides and then shifted to Group B slides.

• Group C (33%) . The slides for this group were photographed so

that the front 33% could be seen . This group started training

4

-
on Group A slides, shifted first to Group B slides, and then

to Group C slides.

• Group D. This group trained throughout on Group C slides

(33% visible).

5. Main Experiment Test Slides. The slides for the three tests

given in the main experiment were as follows :

• Test 1 (100%) . These slides were the same as those used for

Group A but faced the opposite direction .

• Test 2 (67%) . These slides were the same as those used for

Group B but faced the opposite direction.

• Test 3 (33%) . These slides were the same as those used for

Groups C and D but faced the opposite direction.

6. Retest Slides, These slides were the same as those used for

the warm—up and main experiment tests.

In preparing slides of this nature , it is important to insure that

no background cues or other extraneous cues are correlated with one of

the vehicles and not with the others . If background cues are present ,

subjects have a tendency to memorize them. To avoid background cues,

several photographs were taken of each vehicle in a particular condition using a slightly different camera angle and slightly different

positioning of the vehicle . All the slides were then mixed in a random manner so that background cues for a particular vehicle varied

from trial to trial and could not be used for identification purposes.

This need to avoid background cues also prevented a more precise

covering of the distinctive fea tures of each vehicle , even if these

distinctive features could have been ascertained. As Sutherland and

Holgate (1966) have showed , the distinctive features for any one target vary from subject to subject. In the present study , the covering

of various portions of the targets may not necessarily have eliminated

the main distinctive features from all targets, but on a random basis

it can be assumed that the method eliminated many distinctive features.

Experimental Room and Equipment

The experiment was run in a large , soundproofed room with air

conditioning . Each subject was seated at a small table . Six tables

were arranged in two rows about 6 feet apart, one row on each side

of the screen . The front tables were about 8 feet from the screen ,

and the rear tables, about 14 feet . The projected targets were large

enough to be seen comfortably by all subjects .

5

— ____________

_
Procedure

The maximum number of subjects that could be tested in 1 day was

10. On the average , the actual number ranged from 3 to 10; about 5

was average . Depending on the number present , either one or two morning sessions would be scheduled. Each session required 1—1/2 hours ,

including a 10—minute session break . Each morning session consisted

of warm-up training and testing followed by a main experiment training

and testing . The subjects were allowed to watch television in a comfortable lounge area when not participating in the experiment. After

3 hours , the subjects were given the warts-up and main experiment

retests.

The steps in the procedure were as follows :

1. Purpose and Instructions. The purpose of the experiment was

explained , and specific instructions for the warm—up phase were given .

2. Warm-up Training. This training consisted of one preview

trial (no responding) followed by four training trials. Each slide

was presented for 8 seconds during which time the subjects responded

by trying to pick the correct name from a list on the answer sheet.

Only the actual names of the vehicles used were on the answer sheet.

After all subjects responded to each slide , a second projector projected the correct identification underneath the vehicle on the screen .

Using the process of elimination , the subjects should have been able

to guess correctly a high percentage of the targets.

3. Warm—up Test 1. This test was presented immediately following the last training trial. The procedure was the same except that

no correct identifications were given. Since the correct identifications were not given , the probability for guessing right may have been

less than during the training.

4. Warm-up Test 2. This test immediately followed warm-up

test 1 and used the same procedure .

5. Instructions for the Main Experiment.

6. Main Experiment Training. This training consisted of one

preview trial (no responding) followed by nine training trials. The

procedure was the same as for warm—up training. The specific number

of trials for each experimental group was as follows :

• Group A. Nine training trials on Group B slides (100% visible).

• Group B. Three training tr.4 als on Group A slides and six

training trials on Group B slides (67% visible).

6

- -~
• Group C. Three training trials on Group A slides , two training trials on Group B slides , and four training trials on

Group C slides (33% visible).

• Group D. Nine training trials on Group C slides (33% visible).

The guessing probability for the main experiment training was

much less than for the warm-up training because of the greater number

of vehicles and because it was unlikely that the soldiers could retain

in memory the vehicles already shown for any one trial.

7. Main Experiment Tests. All subjects received the same tests.

Half the subjects in each group were given the tests in the 1, 2, 3

order and half in the 3 , 2, 1 order. The procedure for giving the

main experiment tests was the same as for the warm-up tests. During

testing , the correct identification for each vehicle was not shown

at any time . Each test took about 2 minutes to administer.

8. Retests. After a 3—hour interval , each group was administered the warm-up and main experiment tests once again . The content ,

procedure , and order of the retests were the same as for the tests.

RESULTS

The first analysis shows the scores made on the warm-up training

trials and tests. The purpose of this analysis is to determine whether

the experimental groups were equal in ability prior to the start of

the main experiment. This analysis also shows some of the effects of

overshadowing for all subjects combined.

Figure 1 shows the results for the warm—up learning trials , tests

1 and 2 , and retests 1 and 2. The learning task for the warm—up phase

was intended to be fairly simple and consisted of memorizing the names

of four vehicles, all of which had many different features and were

painted different colors. As shown in Figure 1, the task was simple.

All groups made a high score on the first trial following the preview

trial and then progressed to a near perfect score by the fourth trial .

The results for warm-up test 1 show a large fall-off in scores for

all groups, indicating that overshadowing was playing a role. In other

words , the subjects had been memorizing the vehicles based on color

during training. When this cue was removed for test 1, the scores

dropped. The results for test 2 show that the subjects had also

learned something about the shape of the vehicles , because when many

of the shape cues were removed , the scores dropped even further.

7

___ _____ _________________ __________ —-- - - _________
- A , B

~~~~~

C

0

C.

U,

4-,

~ 2 

~ 

A U

‘4-4

0

\ \ \~~~C

.0 ‘

0 8

C S 0 8

C

z

I I

1 2 3 4 1 2 1 2

Training Trials Tests Retests

Figure 1. Mean number of correct responses for each group during

the warm-up phase. (Smoothed curve.)

8

-;

_ 

- - -

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -
From the curves , it appears that all of the groups are equal in

ability, both in terms of jearning and of reacting to the reduction

in cues. A Kruskal—Wallis test for test 2 indicated no significant

difference (p < .22). Retest scores were essentially the same as test

scores. As expected , since only 3 hours intervened between test and

retest, only a slight decrease appears in retest scores.

Figure 2 shows the curves for the learning phase of the main experiment. It should be remembered that each of the groups memorized

the same vehicles, but each group had a different view of the vehicles.

For Groups A , B, and C , the vehicles for the first three trials were

identical (100% visible). The dip in the curve at trial 3 for Groups B

and C was an artifact of the smoothing procedur e and the dip actually

occurred on trial 4 where it would be expected (shift from 100% visible to 67% visible) - It can be seen that shifting from 100% visible

to 67% visible depresses the learning curve for several trials.

Group A appears to have the easiest task , and Group D appears to have

the most difficult task , at least in the first few trials. There did

not seem to be any reason to make an extensive analysis of the learning curves. Kruskal-Wallis tests for trials 1 and 9 revealed no significant differences among the groups.

Figure 3 shows the results for the testing phase of the main experiment. The results are given in terms of percentage of subjects

making a perfect score , because this score appears to be highly sensitive to the procedure . The results appear to be very close to those

predicted according to the concept of overshadowing. The score made

by Group B on test 1 is badly misplaced , but it is interesting to

note in Figure 4 , which shows the retest results , that the score made

by Group B on test 1 is now in the predicted place .

Figure 5 shows the results of the testing phase for the main experiment using the more conventional score of mean number correct.

Here the results are essentially the same as in Figure 3, but are much

less dramatic. Kruskal-Wallis tests were run for tests 1, 2, and 3

with nonsignificant results for test 1 and significant results for

tests 2 and 3 at the .02 and .01 levels respectively. Table 1 shows

results of Mann-Whitney U tests run for the individual scores in

tests 2 and 3. Group A clearly scores less than all other groups

in tests 2 and 3 , and Group D is marginally superior to Groups B and

C on test 3.

1

Kruskal—Wallis tests were used throughout the various analyses because some phases of the data were on the borderline of acceptability

for the analysis of variance or covariance . In all cases where the

analysis of variance or covariance was appropriate , the significance

level was the same as that obtained with the Kruskal—Wallis test.

9

— ~~~~ -

~~~~~~~~~ —---— —
1-

A

1 -

~~~~ ~~~~A-

~~~~~~~*~~~~ 

-

~~~~

- ~

PA’

~-4 4 . 4)

.0

z

C

3 .

2 -

1 •

— I I I I I I I I

1 2 3 4 5 4 7 $

Training Trials

Figure 2. Mean number of correct responses on main experiment

training trials. ( Smoothed curve.)

10

__
U -

A

70 -

C 4

\ ___ \ ~~~~~-A—----- A

~ 

60 -

140

c-I

c-I,

4-) 0 \ U

4,

~~~5 0 - 14

4) \

C

— — — - 

\

•~ 

\

%~ .m~ B O - m 4 0 . ~~ U, ‘ 4-,

S.

—

U I

’ ~~~~~~ 4) ‘

S..

—

.0

S I C,, ’

30- 440

4-)

C

4)

U

4)

A ,B

10 -

- I

1 2 3

100% 67% 33%

Tests

Figure 3. Percent of subjects making perfect score on

main experiment tests .

11

- -

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~~~~

- ;

--

- -

- ‘ ----- -- 

-
80 —

10 —

30 - 

0 \ •1

4-)

C

a)

U

‘-4a) 

0.. ~Il -

•1 A

10

I I I

1 2 3

100% 67% 33%

Tes t s

Figure 4. Percent of subjects making perfect score on

main experiment retests.

12

-_-

~~ - .
8

100% 67% 33%

Tests

Figure 5. Mean number of correct responses on main

experiment tests.

13
Table 1

Significance Levels for Mann-Whitney U Tests ,

Main Experiment , Tests 2 and 3

Test 2

Group Group A Group B Group C Group D

A -— .02 .01 .01

B —— ns ns

C -- ns

Test 3

Group Group A Group B Group C Group D

A —— .01 .01 .001

B -- ns .01

C -- .05

The scores for the retest are so close to the test that the retest scores were not analyzed . However , it is interesting to note in

Figure 6 the percentage of subjects making a perfect score on both

test and retest. Here we see very orderly curves in the direction

predicted by the concept of overshadowing. In this figure ,. Group D

clearly appears to make a superior score on tests 2 and 3.

No mention has been made in the results section of the effect of

counterbalancing the tests ; that is , taking the tests in 1, 2, 3 order

or 3, 2, 1 order. These results were omitted because the effect was

too slight to have any bearing on the scores. For each group , the two

orders with n of 12 each were collapsed into one large group with n

of 24.

DISCUSSION

This experiment was not intended as basic research in the academic sense , but rather as an exploration of how basic research findings might be relevant to a military problem. The concept of overshadowing, although it appears under several names, is well documented .

The present experiment was not designed to provide further evidence

for the concept .

14

- - -
80 -

70 —

~ 60 -

14

0

U

U)

4-)

~~~ 5 0 - ~~~~~~~A D

40 - 

~~~~N\ \

‘

\\

~~~ 

\

\

\N \

Cl) 30 \ N.

\ N~

\ U — ‘

S.

100% 67% 33%

Tests

Figure 6. Percent of subjects making perfect score on both

main experiment test and retest.

15
In fact, the methodology for the experiment perhaps could be

criticized for using tests that are practically the same as the training . However , it should be kept in mind that the long-range focus of

the research is to help solve the military problem : “Given a certain

amount of training time , what is the best training method for teaching target identification for all combat conditions?” In other words ,

the military already has a training procedure similar to Group A in

the present experiment : training on wide-open targets and then expecting the trainees to identify degraded targets. It is realized

that some target identification programs occasionally do use a few

degraded targets. However , these generally are added toward the end

of the program. The primary focus is describing verbally distinctive

features of wide—open targets.

It should be emphasized also that no claim is made that Groups B,

C, and D received superior training programs in comparison to Group A .

A test showing many different partial views of all targets would be

necessary to answer such a question . Group A in the present experiment, for example , might make a better score than the other groups if

only the rear one-third of the vehicles had been included in a test.

(Groups B, C, and D viewed the front portion of the vehicles.)

The results indicate that concepts such as overshadowing should

be considered when designing target identification programs. The

results indicate that the “Law of Least Effort” is pertinent to target identification training and that people have a tendency to expend the least amount of energy to accomplish whatever task is facing

them. In target identification training , we cannot expect people to

pay attention to difficult features if there are easier features

which can be used . If we wish people to be able to identify targets

under certain degraded conditions , it is necessary to train under

these same degraded conditions .

It appears that little incidental learning takes place , especially when going from easy to difficult as did Group A in the present

experiment . However , when going from difficult to easy, as did

Group D in the present experiment , there are some interesting possibilities . Perhaps the ideal training program should consist of only

degraded views of targets , and the trainees should never see the entire target.

Target identification training appears to be an area which needs

a substantial amount of research before a satisfactory program can be

developed . The need is not so much for basic research as it is for

transition research. As Leibowitz (1967) has pointed out , there are

many basic research findings in vision and in perceptual learning that

have not been applied to target identification training. As Cockrell

(1970) has shown, and as the present experiment shows, many of these

basic research findings do appear to make a difference .

16
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

The purpose of this experiment was to investigate the concept of

overshadowing and the role it might play in target identification

training . In target identification terminology , the concept of overshadowing says that trainees will give most of their attention to the

most obvious distinctive feature of a particular target and pay little

attention to less obvious features. The dominant feature is said to

overshadow the remaining features.

The concept was investigated by training four groups of subjects

to identify targets. Each group was trained on a different view of

the targets with more and more of the distinctive features being covered

for some of the groups. The purpose of covering the dominant features

was to force attention to the less obvious features.

The results of the experiment agree with the overshadowing concept and indicate that the best way for trainees to learn to identify

degraded targets is to train on degraded targets. In fact, there is

some evidence to indicate that training on wide—open targets wastes

time at best and may even be harmf ul, and that all training should be

concentrated on different views of degraded targets .

The results were discussed in relation to the adequacy of the research base for target identification training . The conclusion is

that there is good evidence to indicate that many research findings

in the areas of vision and perceptual learning are pertinent to target identification training , and that additional transition research

is needed to investigate the application of these research findings .

17

_ 

~~

‘ :. ~~~~~
REFERENCES

Anderson , N. S., & Leonard , J. A. The Recognition , Naming and Reconstruction of Visual Figures as a Function of Contour Redundancy.

Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1958, 56, 262-270.

Bruner , J., Matter , J., & Papanek , M. L. Breadth of Learning as a

Function of Drive Level and Mechanization . Psychological Review,

1955 , 62, 1—10.

Cockrell , J. T ., & Sadacca , R . Training Image Interpreters in Target

Identificatioji Through Programmed Instruction . Falls Church ,

Va.: TM-WD 740 System Development Corporation , September 1970.

Dukes , W. F ., & Bevan , W. Stimulus Variation and Repetition in the

Acquisition of Naming Responses. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1967, 74 , 178—181.

Leibowitz , H. W. The Human Visual System and Image Interpretation.

Institute for Defense Analyses Research Paper P—3l9 , June 1967.

(AD 817546)

Lovejoy , E. P., & Russell, D. C. Suppression of Learning About a

Hard Cue by the Presence of an Easy Cue . Psychonomic Science,

1967 , 8 , 365—366 .

Mackintosh , N. J. Incidental Cue Learning in Rats. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1965, 17 , 292—300 (b).

Mackintosh , N. J. A Theory of Attention . Psychological Review, 1975 ,

82, 276—298.

Pavlov , I. P. Conditioned Reflexes. London : Oxford University

Press , 1927.

Sutherland , N. S. Partial Re i nforcement and Breadth of Learning .

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1966, 18,

289—301 (a).

Sutherland , N. S., & Holgate , N. Two Cue Discrimination Learning in

Rats. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psychology, 1966 ,

61, 198—207.

Sutherland , N. S., Mackintosh , N. J., & Mackintosh , J. Simultaneous

Discrimination Training of Octopus and Transfer of Discrimination

Along a Continuum. Journal of Comparative and Physiological Psyt~

hology, 1963, 56, 150—156.

Wagner , A. R. Stimulus Selection and a “Modified Continuity Theory. ”

In Bowe r , G. H., and Spence , J. T. The Psychology of Learning

and Motivation (Vol. 3). N.Y. : Academic Press , 1969.

19

— - -,~~~~~~~~~~ --

-. ---- — -.-----—-- —~ - 
DISTRIBUTION

AR I D,striliii i i~~ Lisi

a OASD IMARA) 2 HOIJSACDEC , ft Out ATTN: Library

2 NOVA DAMP CS?) I-IOUSACDEC , Ft Ord , ATTN; ATEC - EX - E Rum Factors

NOVA ((JAPE PBRI 7 USAEEC , Ft Benjamin Harrison . AT TN Litvaiy

IiO(.)A IDAMA AR) 1 UsAPAcDc , Ft Berr~

am uui Harrison , ATTN ATCP HR

1 HODA (DAPE HRE - PO) 1 USA Comm—Elect Sch, Ft Mon,noulh ATTN ATSN EA

I NOVA )SGRD-I0) 1 USAEC , Ft Morim~ uth ATTN: AMSEL - CT HOP

I NOVA (DAM P - DOT C) 1 USAEC , Ft Monmouth , ATTN: AMSEL —PA P

1 NOVA )DAPC - PMZ A) 1 USAEC , Ft Monmouttr , ATTN: AMSEL - SI-CR

1 NOVA ) DACH - PP7 A) 1 USAEC , Ft Monmou th , ATTN: C, Fad 0ev Br

1 NOVA (OAPE-HRE) 1 liSA Materials Sys Anal Agcy, Aberdeen , ATTN : AM XSY - P

1 NOVA (DAP E• MPO- C( 1 Edgewood Arsenal , Aberdeen , ATTN: SAREA AL H

I NOVA IDAPE OW ) 1 USA Ord Ctr & Sch, Aberdeen, ATTN: ATSL--TEM - C

1 HODA (DAPE HAL) 2 USA Hum Engr Lab. Aberdeen , ATTN: Library /Dir

I HODA (DAPE CPS( 1 USA Combat Arms Tog Sri, Ft Bennrnq, ATTN Ad Supervisor

1 NOVA (OAF 0- MEA) 1 USA Infantry Hum Rsch Unit , Ft Benning, ATTN: Chief

1 HODA )DARO.A RS-P) 1 USA Infantry Sd , Ft Benning, ATTN: STEBC - TE- T

- rODA (DAPC PAS A) 1 USASMA . Ft Bliss , ATTN: ATSS- LRC

I NOVA )DUSA OR) 1 USA Air Def Sch. Ft Bliss , ATTN~ ATSA CTO ME

1 ll(~()A lOAM)) RON) 1 USA An Dii) Sch , F r B)ist , ATTN~ Tech Li)r

P P1QIJA ) p)A ~

;C~ 1 USA Air Del Bd. Ft Bliss , ATTN: FILES

I 1-IDlIA )DA IO - Pl) 1 USA Air Dc) Sd, Ft Bliss , ATTN: STEBD--PO

I t. Iii. f . Cons- li Div (VA-OTS O) , Aile)p h . MD 1 USA Cmd & General StI College , Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: Lit,

1 Mi) As ’

,t Ham Res , 000H&E - OAD E&t ,S) 1 USA Cmd & General Stf College , Ft Leavenworth , ATTN. ATSW — SE - L

1 lID PISA HA t - APO Sr’aiil, ATTN A RAG P A 1 USA Cmd & General SrI College , Fr Leavenworth , ATTN; Er) Advisor

I HO F irst Army. ATTN: AFK A-Ol i I LISA Ci,ml,iped Arms Cmbt Dcv Art , Ft Lezw -,iworth , ATTN: DepCrl r

7 HO Fifth Army. Fr Sam Houstorr 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbt Des Act . Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: CCS

1 t )i Army StI Studies Ofc . ATTN OAVCSA )DSPI 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbj Des Act. Ft LeavenworTh, ATTN: ATCASA

I in, Chief if Sr) Stiiilies Ole C USA Combined Arms Cmbt Den Act . Ft Leavenworth. ATTF’ : ATCACO—E

I I}CSl’FR At TN CPS/OCI’ 1 USA Crirnliini’d A n u s Cmbr Den Act , Ft Leavenworth , AT 1i’)’ ATCACC—CI

1 the Aimy Lit,. Peritariol, ATTN. R SB Ch ief I USAFCOM , Night Vision Lab, Ft Bvlvr, ir . ATTN: AMSEL— NV—5O

1 The Army Liii. Peu,taqori . ATTN: ANRAL 3 USA Computer Sys Cmd, Ft Belvoir , ATTN~ Tech Library

1 Of, , Asss Secr i,l the Army R&D) 1 USAMERDC Ft Be)voir , ATTN: STSFB—-DO

I Tech Suppoit Ofc OJCS 1 USA Eng Sch, Ft Belvoir , ATTN : Library

I USASA , Arlrni)t uul ATT N lARD T I USA Topographic Lab, Ft Belvoir , ATTN: ETL TO—S

I LiSA Rsch Oh .. D,,rlsam, ATTN : Lilt Sciences Dir 1 USA Topographic Lab, Ft Belvoir , ATTN : STINFO Center

7 IJSARIEM . N t - k , ATTN SGRD-UE CA I USA Topographic Lab. Ft Belvoir , ATTN: ETL GSL

I IlS/k i 11’ hr ti.iyiori Al IN ~

.tl II: MOA I IJSA hirtr’ lliqi rri’ ’- Cli A Sehi , II Hri ,ii:t urir- ,i, ATTN : CTD MS

I USAIMA , Ft Br.,rj ii. Al IN AISU-CI D-OM 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huach,ica, ATTN: ATS—CT D—MS

1 USAIMA , F r Br,elri , ATT N: Marit uat Lib 1 USA Intelligence Cli & Sch, Ft Huachuca . ATTN: ATS I—TE

1 US WAC Ctr & Sch , F r McClellan . AT TN: Liii 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huachuca , ATTN ATSI-TEX--GS

I US WAC Cit & ScIr , Ft Mc Clellan , ATT N: Tni1 Dir 1 USA Intellig ence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuc a . ATTN: AT SI—CTS —- OR

I liSA Quartermaster Srh, Fr Lee . ATTN: ATSM-TE 1 USA Intelligence Cu & Sch . Ft Huachuca , ATTN : ATS I—CTD--OT

I Intellig ence Material Dee Olc . EWL , Ft HoIaI,ird 1 USA Intelligenc e Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , ATTN: ATSI—CT O—CS

1 USA SE Sirti ral Sch Fr (; rrlon , ATTN . A TSD EA I USA Intelli gence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , ATTN : OAS/SRD

I USA Choirla iii Cii A Sr ’h f t Hairr ilt oii A TTN: ATSC- T E-RD 1 USA Intellig ence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , ATTN ~ ATSI—T EM

1 USA ’! SCH. Fr F mt ,. , ATT N Erl iic A uIvi so r 1 USA I n telli gence Ct , A ScIr , Ft Huachuca , A TTN: Library

1 USA War Collenir’ Carlisle Ba rra c ks , ATTN Lii, 1 CDR , HO Ft Huaci,

~ ca , ATTN: Tecfl Ref Div

2 WRAIR , ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dv 2 CDR . USA Etac tron icP ’vg Grcf , ATTN~ STEEP MT—S

1 DL I , SQA . M i niteiniy 1 HO. TCATA , ATTN Tech Library

1 USA Con netni Anal Aqr :y, Bethes d a , ATTN : MOC A MR 1 HO. TCATA , ATTN AT CAT.OP.O , Ft Hood

1 USA Con ,.epr Airal Agcy. Bethesd a . ATTft MOCA-JF 1 USA Recruiting Cmd , Ft Sheri dan . ATTN: USARCPM-P

I USA Arct i c Test Ctr . APO Seattl e - ATTN STEAC PL-MI 1 Senior Army Mv,. USAFAGOD/TAC . Elgin AF Auir FM No 9

1 USA Arct ic Test Ctr , APO Seattle , ATTN: AMST E-PL TS 1 HO, USARPAC , DCSPER . APO SF 96558, ATTN : GPPE-SE

1 USA Armam ent Cmrl , Redstone Arsenal , ATTN ATSK .TEM 1 Slimion Lib . Academy of Health Sciences , Ft Sam Houston

1 USA Armament Cmd . Rock Island , ATTN: AMSAR-TDC 1 Marine Corps Inst , ATT P4: De.n-MCI

1 FAA - NAFEC . Atlantic City. ATIN: Library 1 HO. USMC . Commandant , ATTN: Code MTMT

1 FAA NAFEC . Atlantic City ATTN: Human Enq u Br I HO. USMC , Commandant , ATTN Code MPI 20 28

1 FAA Aero naut ical Ct r , Oklahoma City, ATTN: AAC 440 2 USCG Academy. New London , ATTN : Admi ssion

2 USA FId Arty Sch. Ft Sill, AT TN Library 2 USCO Acade my , N~ w London , AT TN: Libra ry

I USA Armor Sch . Ft Knox , ATTN Librar y 1 USCC, Training CIr . NY , ATTN CO

I lISA Arnror 5th . Ft Knue , ATIN: ATSR-Dl F I US1 G Trarnn ngCtr . NV , ATTN Educ Sac Ole

I USA Am ,,,, Sch . ~ ~~~~~ ATTN ATSB or i

~ 1 USCO, Psych ol Rcs Be , DC ATTN GP 1/62

1 USA Arm or Sch . Ft 1(0cc ATTN: ATSB CF,a AD 1 HO Mid-Rang , Br , MC Oet . Ouant rco. ATTN P&S Div

21

___ __________
1 US Marine Corps Liaison OIc. AMC, Alexandr ia, ATTN AMCGS -r 1 Diii & Civil Inst of Envi ro Medici n e, Canada

1 USATRADOC , Ft Monroe , ATTN: ATRO- ED 1 AIR CRESS , Kensi ngton , ATTN: Info Sys Br

6 USATRADOC . Ft Monroe , ATTN : ATPR AD 1 Mi litaerpsy kotogi sk Tjenest e, Copenhagen

1 USATRADOC , Ft Monroe , ATTN : ATTS- .EA 1 Military Attache , French Embassy. ATTN: Doc Sec

1 USA Forces Cmd , Ft McPhe,son . ATTN Library 1 Medecin CIte), C.E,R .P A —Arsenal . Tou loi r/Navat France

2 USA Aviation Test Br), Ft Ruckir, , ATTN: STEBG-PO 1 Prin Scientific Off , Ap pI Hum Engr Rsch Oiv Ministry

I USA Agc y Ioi Av iation Safety, Ft Riis,v er , ATTN: Library of Defense , New Delhi

1 USA Agc y for Aviat ion Safety , Ft Rucker , ATTN: Educ Advisor I Pert Rsch Otc Library, AKA , Israel Defense Forces

I USA Aviation Sch , Fl Ruc ker , ATTN P0 Drawer 0 1 Ministeri s van Defensie , 000P/KL. Afd Sociaal

I HOUSA Aviation Sys Cmd , St Louis . AT’TN: AMSAV—ZDR Psychoiogische Zaken , The Hague , Netherlands

7 USA Aviatio n 5ys Tv ’

,) Act , , Edwards AFB, ATTN: SAVTE - -T

I USA Air Del Seh , Fr Ntis ’,, ATTN : ATSA TFM

1 USA An, Mn ilii liiy Rscln & Dcv Lati , Molfott FIn , ATTN: SAVDL -AS

I USA Aviatio n Sch . Ret Trig Mgi , Ft Rucker , ATTN: ATST —T—RTM

1 USA Aviation Sch , CO. Ft Rucker , ATTN: ATST—O-- A

1 HO DARCOM . Alex andria . ATTN: AMXCD -TL

1 NO, DA RCOM . Ale x andria . ATTN: CDR

1 US Military Academy, West Point , ATTN: Serials Unit

1 US Military Academy . West Point , ATT N: Otc of Mill Ld,slip

1 US Mil ita ny Academy West Point ATTN: MAOR

I USA Standardn, atio n Gp. UK , FPO NY . ATT N: MASE-GC

1 Oic of Na.al Rsch , Arti irgs o rn , ATTN Code 452

3 Ole of Naval tl sch , Arlington , ATTN Code 458

Ofc of Naval Rsc h , Arlington , ATTN Code 450

1 Ole if Nava l Rach , Arlin gton . ATTN : Code 441

1 Naval Aen ishic Med Ret Lab , Pens acola , ATIN: AcousSch Div

I N,nvab Ae,uvs inr Meil Ret Lab Pe,isacola . ATTN: Code L51

P Naval Aernist ic Mcii Res Lab, Pe sacola . ATTN ; Code L5

1 Chret of NavY ,-, , ATTN Pers-OR

1 NAVAIR STA N~ “~lk . A TTN: Safety Ct,

1 Nan Oceanograi hic . DC, A TTN: Code 6251, Chaets & Tsch

1 Center ~f Naval A,ra l ATTN: Doc Ctr

I NavAi rSy sCom , ATT N AiR 5313C

1 N~v BuMed. ATTN: 113

1 NavHellcioptee5ub$qua 2, FPO SF 96601

I AFHRI. ~~T( Williams AFB

1 AFHRL ITT) Low ry AFB

AFHRL (AS) WPAFB , OH

2 AFHRL (DOJZ( Brook s AFB

1 AFHRL (003W) Lackland AFB

1 HOUSAF (INYSD(

1 NOUSAF (DPXXA)

I AFVTG lAD ) Randol ph AFB

3 AMRL (HE) WPAFB , OH

2 AF Inst of Tech , WPAFB, OH, ATTN: ENE/SL

1 ATC )XPTDn Randol ph AF E

I USAF AeroMvnl LI,, Brooks AFB (SUL — 4(, ATTN: DOC SEC

I AFOSR (NL( , Arlington

I AF Log Crnd, McClefL in AFB , ATTN: ALC/DPCRB

1 Air Force Academy, CO. ATTN: Dept of B~f Sen

5 NavPe rs & Den Ct r , San Diego

2 Navy Med Neuropsychi atric Rsch Unit , San Diego

1 Wax Electronic Lab , San Diego . ATTN: Res Lab

1 Nan TningCen , San Diego, ATTW: Code 9000— Lib

1 NavPostGraScli , Monter ey, ATTN : Code 55Aa

1 Nav PostGr aSch , Monterey, ATTN: Code 2124

1 Nav Trn g EquipC fr , Orlando . ATTN: Tech Lib

1 US Dept of Labor , DC, ATTN: Manpower Admin

1 US Dept of Justice , DC, ATTN: Drug Enforce Adm in

I Nat Bur of Standard , . DC, ATTN: Computer Info Section

1 Nat Cleari ng House for MH- - Info , Rockv ille

1 Denver Federal Ctr , Lakewood, AT’TN: BIM

12 Defense Documentation Center

4 Dir Psych , Army Hq, Russe ” Ole,, Canberra

1 Scientific Advs r , Mu Sd, Army Hg, Russell Ofcs, Carnaer ra

1 Mil and Air Att ache , Austri an Embassy

I C”n tr e de Recherche Des Facte urs . Humaine de Ia Defense

Natronal e , Bru ssels

2 Canadian Joi n t Staff Washn ngron

1 C/Air Staf f , Royal Canadian AF . ATTN: Per, SW Anal Br

3 Chief . C nadian Del RtcPi Staff , ATTN: C/CRDS(WI

4 Bu ris h Dc) Staff . Brit ish Embassy , Washington

22

-