Technlc

~ 

Paper 362 ]

-

EFFECTS OF ILLUMINATION LEVEL AND

SENSE OF DIRECTION ON LAND

NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE

Joseph I. Peters, Paul R. Bleda, and

Michael L Fineberg

ENGAGEMENT SIMULATION TECHNICAL AREA

r’

~

J

~

iri] Pt

C~ )

U. S. Army

Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

May 1979

Approv.d for public r.lsss. ; dj ptribut ion unlimi ted .

‘9 ~~

‘I i~
U. S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

- FOR TH E BE HAVI ORA L AN D SOCIAL SCI ENC ES

A Field Operating Agency under the Jurisdiction of the

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

WILLIAM L. HAUSE R

J OSEPH ZEI DNER Colonel , US Arm y

Technical Director Command er

NOTICES

DISTRIBUTION. Pvim ry distri bution of this report h been med. by API. Plus . sddre.s corr.spondenc* co ncern ing distribution of reports to: U. S. Army Puurcb Instit ute for the Bshsv ior.I and Social Sciences. ATIN: PERI-P , 5001 E.senhov ~

er Avenue , Alexa ndri a, Virgi nia fl333

FINAL. DISPOSITION: This report may be destroy ed w$~

en it is no longer needsd. Pie., do not return it to

the U. S. Army Rs,.rch Institu te for the Beltevior.l and Social Sciences.

~Q~

j The findings in thi s report are not to be construed us en official Department of the Army position,

unless so designated by oth er euthorited documents.
Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (

~~~i~~~ D.~

. &,t.~~d) __________________________________

~~~~~~~ I%#~# I ~~ ~~~A~~’I1~ I.5 I

~~A~~~~ READ INSTRUCTIONS It F UIt S tJ’Jt..UMCI~ I A U lUll UAU~~ BEFORE COMPLETIN G FORM

I, p5PQPSMUM$I.R .

..-

~~~ ~J2. GOVT ACCESSION NO 3. RECIPIENT’S CATALOG NUMBER

Te~~~~~.~~!J’aper

,

,P62 ~ .J- ~ _______________________

4. ;i E (aid SubUst.)~~~~/,

~-( , 7

f

~~~ ‘

~1 5. TYPE OF REPORT C PERIOD COVERED

- ILLUMINATION LEVEL~~ SENSE OF pIREcTIcN~~~~~~ --

LAND NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE• ‘

~ e. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

I. AUTHOR(.) . .. 5. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(.)

Joseph 1./Peters , Paul R./Bleda/ and _________

Michael L /Fineberg /f/ ,

~ 

(

\~~ I f-- ~~~ —

3. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS tO . PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT , TASK

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

~

and Social Sciences / 2Q163743A774

5001 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 223~~ ‘ 

-~~ ~~._.. -

~

II. CONTROLLING OFFI CE NAME AND ADDRESS .

~~

. I2~ P -

U.S. Army Forces Coninand ~ May 079

9th Infantry Division, Fort Lewis, WA IS. NUMBEROF PAG ES

14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME C ADORESSO1 dUf.ren l fto Ccntrofllng OllIc.) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (of hi. r.post)

Unclassified

IS.. DECLASSIFICATION/DOWNGRADING

SCHEDULE ——

IS. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of skI. R.porl)

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

17. DISTRISUTION STATEMENT (of A. .b.lz.ct .nt.r.d Sn Block 20. II dllf .rw I lr

~~

. R.port)

IS. SUPPLEM ENTARY NOTES

13. KEY WORDS (Caothiu. sr. ,.. aid. If n.c...My id ld.nllfy by block ni b.r)

Sense of direction Night simulation Night maneuvers

Spatial orientation Reverse cycle training Self-assessment

Continuous combat Navigation assessment techniques

Dead reckoning Navigation speed Illumination

Light-attenuating device (LAD) Navigation accuracy Land navigation

ii A STMACT (‘s—— ,.

~~ee ~~~~~ W ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ Id.~~Ifr by block m bar)

The ability of foot soldiers to move at night affords unique military

advantages (a) because of the natural cover provided by darkness and (b) because it allows the Army to perform continuous (around the clock) operations.

)This research quantitatively assessed the ability of infantrymen to perform

a navigation task in conditions of limited visibility without the aid of

night vision devices. Simulation of night was also tested by having the

soldiers wear light-attenuating devices, and individual differences between —

(continued)

DO ~~~~~~ 103 EDU1ON Of I NOV aSs O SOS WTE Unclassified

SEcURITY CLAI$IP1CAIION OF ThIS PASt (es., Des. ~~ 5s.~~~

/
Unclassified SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAOE(PP,s. Dee. Entered)

Item 20 (continued)

-

~ good and poor navigators were studied with regard to the soldier’s persona l — - history , attitudes, and performance on cognitive tests aimed at discriminating sense of direction. The experiment required 30 soldiers to perform a

dead—reckoning task to four checkpoints over a 2,330 m course in mountainous

desert. Ten soldiers navigated during the day , 10 navigated at night,

and the remaining 10 navigated in the day but wore light—attenuating devices

to simulate night. Half the soldiers in each group had a poor sense of

direction , according to their own self-ratings, and the other half a good

sense of direction.

The results indicated that although both navigation speed and accuracy

were degraded to some degree, only navigation speed was significantly affected by night illumination. Compared to daylight performance, those in

the simulated night condition performed like those navigating in actual

night. Navigators with a good self-rated sense of direction tended to

perform better than those with a poor self-rating. Among the tests and

questions correlated with performance , only items relating to navigation

experience were significant. Neither cognitive style nor items related to

city versus country childhood were predictive of navigation ability.

~~~~~~~~~~~ (i/ 0r

al.

Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAOE(lRIsn Des. Sneered)
Technical Paper 362

EFFECTS OF ILLUMINATION LEVEL AND

SENSE OF DIRECTION ON

LAND NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE

Joseph I. Peters, Paul R. Bleda, and

Michael L. Flneberg

Angelo Mirabella, Team Chief

Submitted by: Frank J. Harris, Chief

ENGAGEMENT SIMULATION TECHNICAL AREA

Approved By:

A. H. Blrnbaum, ActIng Director

ORGANIZATIONS AND SYSTEMS

RESEARCH LABORATORY

Joseph ZsIdnte

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR

US. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

5001 Eisenhower A~~nu.. Alexandria, VirgInia 22333

Office, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

Department of the Army

May 1979

Army Project Number Land Navigation

20153743AT74

Appresed for psblc rdesss: ~ SV$bItIOn unlimited.

— -- - - -
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 recornmen- dations for official action normally are conveyed to appropriate military agencies by briefing or Disposition Form.
FOREWORD

The Continuous Combat program of the Army Research Institute for

the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) assesses human performance in

military operations that take place both day and night and particularly

examines performance in land navigation . The purpose of the research

is to improve land navigation training with computer and simulation

techniques, to determine the behavioral differences in navigation

abilities in order to define psychological principles behind good navigation skills, to develop a valid methodology for evaluating navigation

performance , and to determine the perceptual, cognitive , and emotional

effects of day versus night ability on navigation. The research program is responsive to the requirements of the U.S. Army Forces Conmtand

(FORSCOM) and is conducted under Army Project 2Q163743A774, Man-Machine

Interface in Integrated Battlefield Control Systems , FY 1977 Work Program. The research reported in this report was directed by Dr. Aaron

Hyman , chief of the Human Factors in Tactical Operations Technical

Area.

This report explores differences in soldiers ’ land navigation performance during day, night , and simulated night conditions . Light attenuating devices (LADs) were used for simulating night illumination

levels under daylight conditions. Performance differences were also

assessed between soldiers who rated themselves as having a good sense

of direction versus those who rated themselves as having a poor sense

of direction.

Supporting the research efforts were the 9th Infantry Division at

Fort Lewis, Wash., which was the FORSCOM sponsor ; and LTC D. Van Eynde ,

commander of the 2d Battalion , 39th Infantry . Mr. D. Dressel of ARI

helped t-~ plan and design the experiment.

R

clinical Director
ILLUMINATION LEVEL , SENSE OF DIRECTION , AND LAND

NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE

BRIEF

Requirement:

The ability of foot soldiers to move at night provides the miiitary advantages of natural cover provided by darkness and potentially

continuous (around the clock) operations . This research assessed

quantitatively the ability of infantrymen to navigate under conditions

of limited visibility without the aid of night vision devices.

Simulation of nighttime conditions during the day would simplify

observation of soldiers ’ night navigation performance . Simulation of

night by having some soldiers wear light—attenuating devices (LADS)

was tested.

Individual differences between good and poor navigators have implications for training as well as selection. Such differences were

studied with regard to the soldier ’s personal history , attitudes, and

performance on cognitive tests aimed at discriminating sense of

direction.

Procedure :

Thirty soldiers performed a dead-reckoning task to four checkpoints

over a 2,330 m course in mountainous desert. Ten soldiers navigated

during the day, 10 navigated at night, and the remaining 10 navigated

in the day while wearing light-attenuating devices to simulate night.

Half of the soldiers in each group were designated , according to their

own self-ratings, as having a poor sense of direction; the other half

designated themselves as having a good sense of direction. Soldiers ’

performance was evaluated on the basis of navigation speed and distance

error in locating checkpoints . Navigation performance was correlated

with the number of past exercises in navigation as well as scores from

standardized tests of intelligence and cognitive style.

Findings :

Although both navigation speed and accuracy were reduced to some

degree , only navigation speed was significantly affected by night illumination. O~

reral1, navigation times decreased by 40% at night.
Compared to daylight performance , those in the simulated night

condition performed similarly to those navigating at night. That is,

the light-attenuating devices significantly reduced navigation speed

and , to a lesser degree, increased navigation error . Further testing

is required to validate the devices more fully.

Navigators with a good self-rating for sense of direction performed consistently better than those with a poor self-rating. These

results were not significant, but indicate the need for more refined

research in this area.

Among the tests and questions, only navigation experience correlated significantly with performance. Neither cognitive style nor

items related to city versus country childhood were predictive of

navigation ability.

Utilization of Findings:

Troops who move tactically by night dead-reckoning can be expected

to lose up to 40% of their navigation speed in mountainous desert

terrain.

The use of a light—attenuating device to simulate night will degrade navigation performance in the same manner as actual night. Navigation speed is significantly reduced , with less reduction in navigation

accuracy. Filters which provide more light at the bottom of the lens

will not substitute for night completely but will simulate important

aspects of the night environment for training purposes.

Increased practice with navigation problems will increase soldiers’ navigation proficiency. Soldiers who rated themselves as having

a good sense of direction tended to navigate better than those with a

poor sense of direction; such ratings were highly correlated with the

number of past navigation experiences.
ILLUMINATION LEVEL , SENSE OF DIRECTION , AND LAND

NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE

CONTENTS

Page

BACKGROUND 1

METHODOLOGY 2

RESULTS 2

Illumination Variables 3

Sense of Direction 5

Prediction of Good Navigators Based on Demographic

and Cognitive Tests 9

CONCLUSIONS 10

TECHNICAL SUPPLEMENT 11

METHODOLOGY 11

Subjects 11

Apparatus 11

Pretests 12

Experimental Design 12

Procedure 13

RESULTS 14

APPENDIX A. CHECKPOINT MAP 19

B. HISTORY AND EXPERIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE 21

C. ORIENTATION QUESTIONNAIRE 25

D. SCHEDULE OF TESTING 31

E. INSTRUCTIONS TO EACH PARTICIPANT 33

DISTRIBUTION 35

- ____
CONTENTS (Continued)

Page

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. ANOVA of navigation times 15

2. Mean leg navigation times (in minutes) 15

3. Mean route navigation times (in minutes) 16

4. ANOVA of checkpoint localization error 17

5. Mean checkpoint error (in meters) 17

6. Mean checkpoint error per leg (in meters) 18

LIST OF FIGU RES

Figure 1. Leg navigation times for three illumination groups . . 4

2. Checkpoint distance errors for three

illumination groups 6

3. Course navigation times for sense of direction

and illumination groups 7

4. Checkpoint errors for sense of direction and

illumination groups 8

5. Design used in land navigation experiments 13

—-_ - - -—.-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - - - - -.- - ~~~~~~~~ -- ---
ILLUMINATION LEVEL , SENSE OF DIRECTION , AND

LAND NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE

BACKGROUND

The impetus for studying the land navigation proficiency of combat

personnel derives from the evolution of the tactics and doctrine of

the modern Army. According to current thinking, future battlef ields

will not consist of large masses of troops in entrenched positions ,

but will be characterized by a fluid type of warfare . The outstanding

feature of mobile warfare is the multiplication of power by the rapid

concentration of forces at a certain point and at a certain time. The

related doctrine of continuous combat specifies that tactical operations

will be conducted around the clock, under all types of weather conditions, and across various terrains . The evolution of mobile and continuous combat tactics has brought with it an increasing demand for

skill in land navigation and map interpretation. These demands were

detailed in an article in Infantry1 that classified the technical proficiency requirements of infantrymen into two broad categories :

(1) navigation and map use and (2) weapons proficiency.

This report describes the results of an experiment directed at

the study of navigation and map use. The experiment was designed to

evaluate factors that affect development of training and selection

procedures for increasing night mobility effectiveness of operational

troops without the aid of expensive night vision devices.

The major purpose of this experiment was to obtain baseline measures of navigation speed and accuracy as a function of day versus

night illumination levels. In addition , because of the increased emphasis on maximizing night movement and the problems related to observing navigation performance at night, the concept of simulated night

conditions was tested to provide a potentially useful technique for

easily assessing night performance during the day. This simulation

of night was produced by equipping soldiers with light-attenuating

devices (LADs) developed at ARI.

In addition , individual differences in navigation abilities among

soldiers were studied . Although little is known about what makes a

good navigator , evidence indicates that people can assess their own

Infantry Leader: Tactically and Technically Proficient. Infantry,

January-February 1976, vol . 66, no. 1, 20-26.1
sense of direction rather well (Kozlowski & Bryant, ~977)•

2 

To validate this self-assessment technique, soldiers were divided into two

groups--good and poor--based upon their assessment of their sense of

dirc-ti ion (SOD). Much information could be obtained if , in fact, the

good—-as self-rated--soldiers navigated significantly faster or more

accurately than the poor--as self-rated--soldiers. The source of such

differences in performance could be identified more easily , and the

underlying psychological principles could be applied to navigation

training procedures as well as to selection of expert navigators.

To supplement the self—assessment procedure, a battery of tests

and questions was given to determine if demographic or cognitive tests

can predict who will be good navigators.

METHODOLOGY

Thirty soldiers were tested on a dead-reckoning navigation task.

Ten soldiers navigated during the day , 10 navigated at night, and

the remaining 10 navigated during the day under simulated night conditions with the use of the LADs. Before they performed the navigation

task, the soldiers were administered a battery of cognitive tests and

questions cn their backgrounds and attitudes. Based on self-ratings

of sense of direction , half of the soldiers in each illumination condition were grouped as having a poor sense of direction , and the other

half were classified as having a good sense of direction.

For the navigation task, soldiers were given maps of the area

with their routes drawn on the maps. The route, located on the Yakima

Firing Center Military Reservation near Yakima, Wash., extended 2,330 m

through desert terrain and was divided into four separate legs. The

magnetic azimuths and metric distances to each of the four checkpoints

were listed for the soldiers on the maps. Each soldier was required

to lead the experimenter to each checkpoint.

RESULTS

The major purposes of this experiment were to determine the effects of day versus night illumination levels on soldiers’ navigation

speed and accuracy and to validate the’ concept of using LADs to simulate night conditiong. A secondary purpose was to determine if a soldier ’s assessment of his own sense of direction would reflect reliable

differences in navigation performance. In addition , the experiment

investigated the possibility that demographic background or performance

2

Kozlowski, L. T., & Bryant, K. J. Sense Direction, Spatial Orientation , and Cognitive Maps. Journal of Expe rimental Psychology: Human

Perception and performance, 1977, vol. 3, no. 4, 590—598.

2 

-

~~

- . ~~

- .
on selected cognitive tests could predict good navigators. Navigation

accuracy was measured as the number of meters between the actual checkpoint and the location of the checkpoint as designated by the soldier.

Navigation speed was measured in minutes for each leg of the route.

Both the illumination conditions and the self-ratings of sense of direction were evaluated with these error and time measures, and the

predictive ability of the tests and demographic variables were assessed through correlational techniques.

Illumination Variables

There was an overall degradation in performance as a result of

the nighttime conditions. Although such a degradation was not surprising , the data and field observations of navigation behavior provided interesting insights. For example, although both speed and

accuracy diminished at night, the analysis indicated that only navigation speed was degraded by a significant degree. Such results did

not support the expectation that darkness would cause more soldiers to

“get lost” as would be indicated by significantly poorer performance

in both navigation speed and accuracy . As with night illumination ,

the simulated night conditions produced by the LADs also degraded navigation performance. Such degradation supports the validity of the

LADs as a possible research and training tool.

Figure 1 presents the mean navigation times for the Day, LAD,

and Night groups in each of the four legs of the route. When measured

across the legs, these times reflected significant differences among

all groups. As one would predict, the Day group had the fastest

times, and the Night group had the slowest times. On the average,

navigation time increased 40% under night conditions. A standard of

3,000 m was used as a probable distance required for travel near enemy

lines, and a linear relationship was assumed between navigation time

and distance. Thus, the data project the daylight travel times would

be 47 minutes , compared to 67 minutes at night. This represents a

20-minute difference for a relatively easy dead-reckoning task in open

terrain.

The LADs used in the experiment were designed to reduce the ambient light level to that of a partially moonlit evening. Because the

LADs had not been tested previously in the field , safety considerations

required the use of bidensity filters in the LADs. These filters provided more light at the bottom of the lens so that soldiers could more

easily verify their footing ; however , these filters prevented seeing

distant land cues with equal ease. The data in Figure 1 suggest that

even after the novelty effects wore off (represented in Leg 1), the

LADs still degraded the soldiers ’ navigation speed to a significant

degree . Apparently, however, the safety feature of the bidensity concept allowed soldiers to travel signific~ntly faster than those traveling in actual night conditions. If the safety feature had not been

used , performance times of the LAD and Night groups probably would

not have differed .

3

-- ----

~ 

—-.- -- -
In

>-

— _J 0

Ii

Wi 

~

;

I

I I I I I I I —

IJ

~

S~

JI3W 005 UJd NIW

4
Figure 2 presents the mean checkpoint distance errors of the three

illumination groups for each leg of the route. Those navigating at

night had a 60% greater error in locating the checkpoints than did

those navigating by day. Performance of the LAD group generally fell

between performances of the Day and Night groups. Although the relative

performance of the groups was as predicted , the statistical analysis

indicated that, unlike navigation times, the average checkpoint errors

were not significantly different. The simplicity of the dead—reckoning

task combined with the “easy” line-of-sight navigation conditions appear to have made navigation accuracy less of a problem than navigation

speed. Had the navigation route been in more difficult terrain with

heavy woods that precluded line-of-sight navigation , checkpoint accuracy might have been significantly affected by the illumination

conditions.

Sense of Direction

Soldiers who had rated themselves as having a good SOD tended to

navigate better than those who rated themselves as having a poor SOD.

That is, although there were no statistically significant differences

between the groups, good SOD soldiers navigated more quickly and with

less checkpoint error than poor SOD soldiers. An increase in the number of soldiers tested might have resulted in group differences with

the desired statistical significance.

Figure 3 presents the average navigation times for the two SOD

groups over the entire 2,330 in course. In comparing the groups across

illumination conditions, one can see little difference between good and

poor SOD soldiers in the daylight condition. Under the simulated night

condition (LAD) and the actual night condition , the poor SOD soldiers

took about 25% and 16% longer, respectively, to navigate than did the

good SOD soldiers. Although such differences were not statistically

significant, it does appear that something, perhaps the stress induced by night conditions and especially the LAD’s simulation of night,

reduced the navigation speed of the poor navigators.

Figure 4 shows the average checkpoint distance errors for the

two SOD groups. Compared to good SOD soldiers, poor SOD soldiers

made consistently greater checkpoint distance errors across all illumination conditions. This was unlike the navigation speed measures

in which both good and poor SOD soldiers appeared to do equally well

under daylight conditions. Overall, poor SOD soldiers displayed a

15% to 20% greater error than good SOD soldiers. This difference was

not statistically significant; however, the consistency across illumination conditions lends support for further research on the validity

of self—assessment techniques for selecting navigators.

5
In

Q4 I—..

m 0

~~ S

0

4)

q -. .

~

. -I

r.e

S ~ -I

S S

S

• 4)

•

b• U)

• — 110

• I u_i ai ~~~~~~~~~~~ L)

4)

U)

-4 -

N S • LI

~ S

•

• U

4)

—I

g , f • y •

f-I ~~ O~ 00 1- 1.0 LA f-I ~~ ~~

(S~

1313W)

~

lO~

d3 IN!Od)133H3

6

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ---- - -
UI

1

~~~ 4) (

~

J

I —

-4

—4

-4

I

I

i

t — S

I— 0 i

t — it U it S

14

it

\

\

e

~ .

~

4)

U)

8

I’ I’

(S3IONIW)

3W!! N0I.LV9!MN 3SdflO3

7
h

4) it it —

‘ I— 

it ~In

it — 1.4

~~ 0

it 4-I

it —I 

it ~ ~

_I 1.4 it — 0 it 1.4 it 1.-I S

>_ 4)

it.., a

0

S

8

(SdJ!JW)

931 d3d ~0d~3 ‘!d)13 ‘

39AV8
Prediction of Good Navigators Based on Demographics and Cognitive

Tests

The adage that “country boys” are better navigators than “city

boys” was tested by correlating demographic data on the soldiers with

their navigation performance. In addition to demographics, soldiers’

responses to questions such as “How often do you go hiking?” , “Do you

prefer to be the driver or passenger when riding in a car?”, and “Do

you like to read maps?” were correlated with actual performance. Also, soldiers’ scores on formalized tests such as the Witkin’s Embedded

Figures Test and the Locations Test under the Armor Systems Selection

Battery were correlated with performance .

The results of these correlational analyses indicated that navigation experience displayed the strongest relationship with actual

navigation performance. Those who had been in the Army for 2 years

or longer and those who had participated in more than seven field exercises in land navigation performed significantly better than soldiers with fewer years of experience or less practice in navigation.

There was no evidence , however , that those who had lived in the

country performed better than those who had grown up in an urban area.

As discussed above, those who rated themselves as having a good

SOD navigated consistently better than those with a poor self—rating

of SOD . In a further analysis of this phenomenon, it was found that

soldiers with a better sense of direction regarded themselves as people

who inspect a map before departing on ..he auto trip, enjoy map reading, stay calm when they feel they are lost, and are good at remembering verbal directions.

From these results, good navigators appear to be more experienced

map users and therefore more able to translate symbolic representations

of the terrain into a mental schema to which they can refer while

navigating.

The correlations of performance with scores on the formalized

cognitive tests were not predictive of good navigators. The low correlation of performance with scores on the AFQT, Locations Test, and

Embedded Figures Test indicated that neither intelligence nor perceptual style contributed to good navigation performance . The trend

of better performance among better self-rated navigators and the high

correlation of such self—assessments with attitudes toward maps contribute to the evidence relating past experience with good navigation

performance. It also supports the conclusion that better navigators

do not have an innate homing or orientation instinct. In addition ,

having lived in rural areas does not imply exposure to more navigational experiences, i.e., that “country boys” are better navigators

than “city boys.” The observed deficiencies in basic skills of cornpass usage , map reading, and pace counting support a hypothesis that

poor navigators have had insufficient experience to develop such skills

adequately .

9

- —~~~~~~- - - -—---- ~~~- --- —-
CONCLUSIONS

Given a dead-reckoning task in desert terrain , soldiers’ navigation speeds will significantly decrease under nighttime conditions;

however, navigation accuracy, although degraded , is not as seriously

affected. Navigation performance in a heavily wooded environment was

not tested but could compound the task sufficiently that soldiers would

indeed get lost.

Simulation of night with LAD can provide an observer with all the

advantages of daylight visibility while evaluating the night navigation behavior of soldiers. The validity of the LADs for simulating

night was supported by the significantly degraded navigation performance of those who wore the device. Further testing of the LADs is

needed.

Soldiers who rated themselves as having a good sense of direction

navigated consistently faster and with fewer errors than those who .rated

themselves as having a poor sense of direction. Although such differences were not statistically significant, the trends in performance

suggest that the difficulty associated with more demanding navigation

tasks may reveal the utility of self—evaluation for selection and training purposes.

“Country boys” do not navigate better than “city boys.” An analysis of the soldiers’ backgrounds showed no significant relationship

between navigation performance and factors pertaining to childhood environment. With regard to cognitive tests, neither general intelligence (AFQT) nor perceptual style (field dependence vs. independence)

correlated highly with navigation performance .

Navigation experience correlated most highly with individual performance. Soldiers who had been in the Army more than 2 years and who

had had more than seven exercises involving land navigation demonstrated

significantly better navigation performance. These results reinforce

the need for training by increasing the exposure of soldiers to actual navigation problems.

10 

- _ ~~~~~~~~~~-

..-.~~~~- - - ----
TECHNICAL SUPPLEMENT

METHODOLOGY

Subjects

One hundred soldiers were randomly selected from A , B, and C companies of the 2d Battalion , 39th Infantry at Fort Lewis, Wash. From

this number , 45 were selected as experimental candidates, of which 30

were tested in the navigation task .

Apparatus

Light-Attenuating Devices (LADs). The LADs used in this experiment consisted of the standard protective field mask (Ml7Al ) to which

light—attenuating lenses were added as outserts. The lenses, or

f ilters , reduced the ambient light level to that of a partially moonlit evening. Because these filters had not been tested in the field ,

a bidensity version of the filters was incorporated into the mask as

a safety factor. Such filters provided more light at the bottom of

the lens so that users could verify their footing more easily; however , users could not see distant land cues with the same ease. The

upper portion of the lens attenuated the light by a factor of 5.5, and

the lower slit attenuated the light by a factor of 4.0.

Litton AN/PSN-6 Position Location System. This piece of equipment is a man—portable unit that provides position information to the

user in the form of LORAN time differences or universal transverse

mercator coordinates in eight digits. It was used in the Yakima experiment to measure the lateral deviation of the navigator from the

desired course ; it was hoped that this instrument could provide a significant methodological breakthrough for assessment of navigation

performance.

Compass. A standard , government-issued lensatic compass with

luminous dial was used by all soldiers.

~~~~~~ . Each soldier was given an 8” x 10.5” map with approximately

4 km2 represented on a scale of 1:10,000. The map is included as Appendix A. The starting point and the legs to all four checkpoints

were indicated on the map by thick yellow lines. The bottom right

corner of the map listed both the magnetic azimuths and the required

distance to be traveled to each checkpoint.

11 

--, ~~-- ~~~~~~~ _- - -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - -
Pretests

History and Experience Questionnaire. This was a brief , 22-item

que. ionnaire designed to obtain a geographic description of each

soldier’s childhood neighborhood and a description of both childhood

and Army navigation experiences. This questionnaire also provided

information necessary to select experimental subjects for further

testing to see if self—assessments of sense of direction predicted

land navigation performance. The questionnaire is included as Appendix B.

Orientation Questionnaire. This served as a followup to the

History and Experience Questionnaire for those selected as experimental candidates. The questionnaire represents a slightly modified

version of that used by Kozlowski and Bryant (1977) in their research

on sense of direction. This questionnaire was used to see whether

soldiers’ personal attitudes or habits about their own navigation

as pedestrians and drivers could predict good and poor performers in

a land navigation task. It is included as Appendix C.

Locations Test. This is part III of the U.S. Army Armor Systems

Selection Battery (Booklet Two). It measured the ability of soldiers

to select correctly a photograph that was taken from the point of view

designated in a master photograph. Good performance in this test was

expected to correlate highly with a soldier’s navigation abilities.

Armed Forces Qualifications Test (AFQT ). These percentiles were

obtained from Form 20 of the subjects’ 201 files.

Witkin’s Embedded Figures Test (EFT)--Form A. This is a perceptual test that measures field dependence—independence . It was

hypothesized that those who were more field-independent would be

better navigators than those who were more field-dependent, because

the former would be better able to use a map. That is, fieldindependent persons could better identify those features which defined their position and could better relate such features from a

map to the corresponding terrai~~.

Experimental Design

The two major variables of this study were illumination conditions and sense of direction (SOD). Illumination conditions consisted

of three groups--Day , LAD, and Night. The Day and Night groups performed the navigation tasks under prevailing daylight and nighttime

illumination conditions, respectively. The LAD group performed in

the same daylight conditions as the Day group but wore LADs to simulate night conditions.

12
The second variable, sense of direction, was a measured variable

determined by the soldiers’ responses to a question that asked them

to rate how good they thought their SOD was on a 7-point scale. Those

considered to have a good SOD scored between l and 3, and those classified as having a poor SOD scored between 3 and 7. The overlap of

ratings between groups was due to the substitution of a relatively

few soldiers who rated themselves as poor in SOD with alternates who

had better SOD self—assessments.

Each subject was required to navigate to four checkpoints. The

final experimental design incorporated these checkpoints into the

third variable to produce a 2 x 3 x 4 (SOD x illumination x checkpoint)

mixed , repeated-measures design for statistical analysis. Figure 5

illustrates this design.

Checkpoints

Illumination SOD Se 1 2 3 4

1—

Good 5 _____ ______

6— Day Bad 10 _____ _____

11—

Good 15 ____ _____

r.An 16—

Bad 20 _____ _____

21—

Good 25 _____ ______

Night 26-

____________________ Bad 30 _____ ______

Figure 5. Design used in land navigation experiments.

Procedure

ARI scientists briefed 100 Fort Lewis soldiers on the nature of

the experiment, which was to take place during night exercises at the

Yakima Test Firing Center. Soldiers who wore glasses were excused ,

because sizing constraints prevented their wearing the LADs. The

remaining soldiers were informed that they had been chosen for further testing, that their names would be used for administrative and

statistical control purposes only, and that full confidentiality of

their responses would be maintained.

13
The History and Experience Questionnaire (the first administered)

included a question asking soldiers to rate how good they thought their

sense of direction was on a 7-point scale from Good to Bad. Forty-five

soldiers with scores near the extremes of the scale were considered for

further testing. Of these 45 soldiers, 15 were assigned to a “good ”

sense of direction group, 15 were assigned to a “poor ” sense of direction group, and the remainder served as alternates. All 45 soldiers

were given the Locations Test before they were dismissed . Finally ,

the experimenters obtained AFQT scores from existing test files.

All Fort Lewis pretesting was performed on a group testing basis.

The remaining pretesting and experimental data collection took place

1 week later at Yakima Firing Center on an individual basis. Each

soldier was tested according to a standard procedure. The testing

schedule is in Appendix D, and the instructions read to each soldier

appear in Appendix E. The procedure involved introducing the problem

to the soldier, administering the EFT test, and initiating the navigation task.

In performing the navigation task, each soldier was accompanied

by one or two experimenters. During the night and LAD conditions,

the experimenter preset the lensatic compass to the correct az imuth

for each checkpoint so that the soldier was merely required to align

the luminous compass guides. The experimenters stayed behind the

navigator so as not to influence the soldier’s direction of travel.

At intervals of approximately 2 minutes, the soldier was asked to

stop, remember his pace count, and wait as the experimenter recorded

the eight—digit coordinates supplied by the AN/PSN-6 Position Location

System. When the soldier arrived at where he thought the checkpoint

was located , the experimenter recorded the time and measured the distance between the proposed and actual checkpoint locations. The soldier was then brought to the actual checkpoint and directed to continue to the next checkpoint.

RESULTS

Table 1 presents the summary statistics for the 2 x 3 x 4 (SOD x

illumination x leg) ANOVA on navigation times. An analysis of the

significant illumination main effect revealed that the Day group

navigated significantly faster than the LAD group, which navigated

significantly faster than the Night group. Table 2 presents the mean

leg navigation times, which show the main effect of the three illumination groups.

In addition to the illumination main effect, there was a siqnificant interaction between the illumination conditions and the specific

legs that comprised the route. Table 2 shows a significant deviation

of the LAD group from the other illumination groups in the first leg

of the route. Only in the first leg does the LAD group perform at

the same level, if not a little worse , than the Night group. This

14

- - - - - -- -

~~~ -- - r-- - .-_- - - - - -
Table 1

ANOVA of Navigation Times

Source df MS F P

Between Se )

I—(Illumination ) 2 323967 4.30 .05

D—(Sense of Direction) 1 182599 2.42 n.s.

ID 2 67860 —— n.s.

S(ID)—(Subjects) 24 75386

Within Ss

L—(Leg) 3 236961 25.03 .001

IL 6 24429 2.58 .05

DL 3 7397 -- n.s.

IDL 6 8976 —— n.s.

SL(ID) 72 9468

Table 2

Mean Leg Navigation Times (in Minutes)

Illumination Leg 1 Leg 2 Leg 3 Leg 4

condition (510 M) (560 M) (530 M) (730 M)

Day 7.7 8.5 9.0 11.0

LAD 11.3 9.6 9.6 13.4

Nigh t 10.6 12. 2 11.0 14.4

15
probably occurred primarily because of the novelty effect of the LADs ;

after the novelty had worn off, fidelity of night simulation was probably better represented in the last three legs.

By collapsing the time scores across illumination conditions and

focusing on the average leg times alone, one can see that navigation

times increased over the longer legs of the route. This is reflected

in Table 1 through the statistically significant main effect for leg.

Table 3 displays the mean route navigation times for good and poor

sense of direction groups across the illumination conditions. With a

total N of 30, there was no significant difference between good and

poor self-rated navigators. The consistent trend for good SOD soldiers

to do better than poor SOD soldiers, however, may justify further study

on the utility of self-assessments of sense of direction for predicting

navigation performance.

Table 3

Mean Route Navigation Times (in Minutes)

Illumination conditions

Sense of directi~

in Day LAD Night

Good 36.8 39.0 44.8

Poor 35.8 48.7 51.9

Table 4 presents the ANOVA results for checkpoint localization

error. Neither illumination nor sense c~. direction significantly affected this error. Table 5 provides the mean checkpoint errors (summed

across legs) for the sense of direction and illumination conditiofls.

The only variable having a significant effect on checkpoint error

was route leg. Table 6 presents the mean checkpoint errors for each

leg, across each illumination condition. This table shows that as leg

lengths increased , the magnitude of checkpoint error also increased.

L ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
Table 4

ANOVA of Checkpoint Localization Error

Source df MS F p

Between Ss

I—(Illumination) 2 10388 1.85 n.s.

D—(Sense of direction) 1 98 —— n.s.

ID 3 2186 —— n.s.

S(ID)— (Subjects) 24 5613

Within Ss

L— (Leg) 3 10465 4.23 .05

IL 6 1346 —— n.s.

DL 3 3811 1.54 n.s.

IDL 6 2622 1.06 n.s.

SL(ID) 72 2471

Table 5

Mean Checkpoint Errora (in Meters)

Sense of direction Day LAD Night

Good 65 78 111

Poor 76 88 96

aErrors were summed across checkpoints.

17
Table 6

Mean Checkpoint Error Per Leg (in Meters)

L..

Illumination Checkpoint 1 Checkpoint 2 Checkpoint 3 Checkpoint 4 conditions (510 m) (560 m) (530 m) (730 m)

T.

Day 

arj 

51 82 46 104

55 98 88 92 Night 82 109 102 120

18

- —~—~~~~~~~ -—-.--——- --

~~~~~~~~~
APPENDIX A

CHECKPOINT MAP

H B

( &

~~~

2

~

’ \

~

AN

~

L

/ I 4 1 I 1. 300

2. 240 560M

I 3. 133 53011

19 4. 062 73011

- - -

~~~~~~~ - ‘~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ --- ~~~~~~~~ - --- ~~~~~ ___
APPENDIX B

HISTORY AND EXPERIE!~ E QUESTIONNAIRE

NAME ____________

NAME OF

R ANK _____________ IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR (i.e., who tells you

your orders) ____________________________

1. Age ___________ 2. Height ______________

3. Weight _________ 4. RighI~ or Left- Handed .

Right — Left _____

5. Do you wear glasses during combat training?

Yes ____ No ____

6. How long have you been in the Army?

________ Years ________Months

7. How long have you been at Ft. Lewis?

________Years ________Months

8. Have you ever participated in an exercise at the Yakisia Firing Center?

Yes ________ No ________

9. Approximately how many classroom courses have you had which covered

the topic of navigation? _________________________

10. Approximately how many field exercises involving navigation have you

participated in? ___________________________________

11. Before entering the Army , did you ever go hiking?

(circle the most appropriate it~~ )

very very

rarely rarely sometimes frequently frequently

12. Before entering the Army , have you ever used a compass?

very very

rarely rarely sometimes frequently frequently

13. Were you ever a Cub Scout? ________ Yes _______ No

21 

---

~ ----- -

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -.- - ~~~~ --~
14. Were you ever a Boy Scout? _______ Yes _______ No

15. Where did you live during i

~~st of your childhood (From ages 5 to 12) ?

___________ Large City ___________ Small City

- Suburbs ____________ Rural

16. Wha t was the distance between your house and your nearest childhood

neighbor ’s house?

_______ Just a few yards (Less than 25 yards)

_______ A short walk (25 to 100 yards)

_______ A moderate walk (100 to 400 yards)

_______ A long walk (400 yards to 1 mile)

________ Within driving distance (Over 1 mile)

17. Which best describes the terrain of your childhood neighborhood ?

_________ Mountains _________ Hills

_________ Flatland _________ Wa terfront

18. Which best describes the growth around your childhood neighborhood ?

_________ Heavily Wooded

_________- Moderately Wooded

_________ Lightly Wooded

19. As a child , did you ever camp outside 

(a) ... in your own neighborhood?

very very

rarely rarely sometimes frequently frequently

(b) ... away from your own nei~

,hborhood?

very very

rarely rarely sometimes frequently frequently

20. Which would you say you were?

___________ 

“City Boy” ____________ 

“Country Boy”

22

_ ___ - - -
21. Which describes you the best?

________________ Athletic

______________ Studious

______________ Hobbyist

22. How good is your sense of direction?

Good ____ : ____ : ____ : ____ ____ : ____ : ____ Bad

23
APPENDIX C

ORIENTAT ION QUESTIONNA IRE

NAME _ _________

There are no correct or incorrect answers to these questions. Please

answer thmn in order. Proceed quickly and do not go back to a previous

answer.

A note on filling out this questionnaire: Many questions are followed

by answers in scale form. To answer, place a check mark in the space

that best indicates your response.

Examples: How do you feel about falling down ten flights of stairs?

dislike C : _____ : _____ : B : _____ : _____ : A like

Response “A” : indicates that you like falling down stairs very much.

Response “B” indicates that you neither like nor dislike falling

down stairs.

Response “C” : indicates that you strongly dislike falling down stairs.

1. How good is your sense of direction 

(a) In the city?

GOOD ______ : ______ ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ BAD

(b) In the country:

GOOD ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ BAD

2. How good is your ability to judge distance?

GOOD ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ BAD

3. How good is your ability to judge time?

GOOD ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ ______ : ______ BAD

4. How good is your memory for the following things:

(a) Places?

GOOD ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ ______ : ______ BAD

(b) Faces?

GOOD ____ : ____ ____ : ____ :_ : ____ : ____ BAD

25
(c) Names?

GOOD _____ : _____ : _____ : _____ : _____ : _____ : _____ SAD

5. Pretend that you have a car readily available. If you’re in no hurry,

how often will you walk rather than drive to a destination for the

distances listed below? Circle the correct response.

I will walk:

(a) Short distances (less than one mile)

very almost

rarely rarely sometimes frequently always

(b) Medium distances (1 to 2 miles)

very almost

rarely rarely sometimes frequently always

(c) Longer distances (More than 2 miles)

very almost

rarely rarely sometimes frequently always

6. Do you drive? _____ Yes _____ No

7. a. Assume that you yourself know how to reach a particular destination.

Would you enjoy giving directions to that destination to other people?

strongly strongly

dislike ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ like

b. Do you think that you are good at giving other people directions?

Very Very

Bad ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ Good

8. (a) In general, when driving a car , do you try whenever possible , to find

new routes?

very almost

rarely rarely sometimes frequently always

(b) In general, is it important that the new routes you take are more

efficient?

not somewhat moderately very extremely

important Importan t important important Important

(c) In general , is it important that the new routes you find are interesting?

not somewha t moderately very extremely

Impor tant important Impor tant important important

26

__ --—--- —- -—---- - -- -

~~

--
9. (a) In general, when walking, do you try , whenever possible, to find new

routes?

very almost

rarely rarely sometimes frequently always

(b) In general, is it important that the new routes that you do find are

more efficient?

not somewhat moderately very extremely

important important important important important

(c) In general, is it important that the new routes you find are interesting?

not somewhat moderately very extremely

important important important important important

10. Assuming that you are with someone who drives as well as you do , would you

rather be the driver or passenger in a car?

______________________ Driver _________________________ Passenger

11. Rate the following adjectives to describe how you feel when you are lost

(i.e., when you do not know how to reach an anticipated destination).

Assume that you would like to reach your destination soon, but that you

have no appointments.

anxious _____ : _____ : _____ : _____ : _____ : _____ : _____ not anxious

attentive _____ : ______ : _____ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ inattentive

calm ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ excited

good _____ : ______ : ______ : _____ : ______ : ______ : ______ bad

d espairing ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ : ______ hopeful

12. How good are you at following written directions to go to a place you have

never been before?

very

poor poor fair good excellent

13. How good are you at remembering verbal directions and using them to get to

a place you have never been before?

very

poor poor fair good excellent

14. (a) Do you think you daydream more or less than the average person?

much less less same more much more

27
(b) Do you ever daydream while driving?

very very

rarely rarely sometimes frequently frequently

(c) Do you ever daydream while walking?

very very

rarely rarely sonetimes frequently frequently

15. When you are traveling through an area that you are unfamiliar with, do

you make a conscious effort to note new details in the landscape?

very almost

rarely rarely sometimes - frequently always

16. When you are traveling through an area that you are unfamiliar with , do you

make a conscious effort to remember new details in the landscape?

very almost

rarely rarely sometimes frequently always

17. (a) Have you ever had an experience where you felt tha t you have done

something or been somewhere before, even when you know you haven ’t?

very almost

rarely rarely sometimes frequently always

(b) With wha t intensity do you usually have this experience?

very very

weakly slightly moderately strongly strongly

18. When you are a passenger in a car , do you often remember the route you

have travelled?

very almost

rarely rarely sometimes frequently always

19. After being a passenger in a trip through a medium sized city , do you think

you could redrive the route if the entire trip was :

(a) 5 minutes long _______ Yes _______ No

(b) 15 minutes long _______ Yes _______ No

(c) 30 minutes long _______ ‘!es _______ No

(d) 1 hour long _______ Yes _______ No

(e) 2 hours long _______ Yes _______ No

20. Do you usually carry a watch with you?

_______ Yes ________ No

21. Do you prefer to be early or exactly on time for an appointment?

_________ Early __________ Exactly on time

28

____
I

22. Do you enjoy reading maps?

Hate to _____ : _____ : _____ : _____ : _____ : _____ : _____ Really enjoy it

23. When driving to an unknown destination:

(a) Do you inspect a map before leaving?

very almost

rarely rarely sometimes often always

(b) Do you use a map throughout your route?

very almost

rarely rarely sometimes often always

(c) Do you ask for directions when you think you are near?

very almost

rarely rarely sometimes often always

24. When referring to a map in your car , do you always keep the map right—side—up

or do you turn the map in the direction of your travel?

__________ Right—side—up __________ Direction of travel

25. When you were a little kid , do you ever recall becoming lost while you were

out on an adventure or exploring with a friend?

________ No , I can not recall this ever happening.

________ I remember it happening a couple of times, or was told it did .

________ I remember it happening many times, or was told it did .

26. Do you find traveling at night easier or more difficult than traveling

during the day ?

________ Day is easier ________ Night is easier ________ Both are the same

27. On a trip , which would you rather be: the driver ; the map reader ; or

a passenger . Circle your choice.

29

________
APPENDIX D

Schedule of Testing

Illumination SOD

Date Time Group Group Sublect No.

31 May 77 1035 DAY Good 26

1340 LAD Good 28

2000 NIGHT Good 29 A

1 Jun 7’ 1410 DAY Poor 15

1630 LAD Poor 14

2300 NIGHT Poor 13

2 Jun 77 1335 DAY Good 30 “ 1617 LAD Good 20

2213 NIGHT Poor 1

3 Jun 77 1410 LAD Good 27

6 Jun 77 1348 LAD Good 16

1555 DAY Good 17

2227 NIGHT Good 18

7 Jun 77 1400 LAD Poor 10

1700 DAY Poor 9

2200 NIGHT Poor 8

8 Jun 77 1430 LAD Good 25

1640 DAY Good 24

2200 NIGHT Good 23

9 Jun 77 1315 LAD Poor 12

1525 DAY Poor 11

2215 NIGHT Poor 2

10 Jun 77 1330 LAD Good 21 “ 1530 DAY Good 22

12 Jun 77 2200 NIGHT Good 19

2345 NIGHT Poor 7

13 Jun 77 0200 NIGHT Poor 6

14 Jun 77 1030 DAY Poor 3

“ 1230 LAD Poor 4

1400 DAY Poor 5

31
APPENDIX E

INSTRUCTIONS TO EACH PARTICIPANT

I’m Dr. ____________ from the Army Research Institute in Alexandria ,

VA. You ’ve been specially selected from all of the people in your

battalion to help us in this study of land navigation. We are trying to

find out how to help the Army teach people tu ~~vigate more accurately .

During the next 2 1/2 hours you will be asked n series of questions,

given the opportunity to compete on a challenging land navigation problem

and asked to participate in two simple exercises related to your ability

to locate both yourself and some figures in relation to the surrounding

area .

The first part of our time is devoted to finding out how you feel

about the upcoming tests. I am going to give you a list of words and you

are to decide whether or not each word describes the way you feel right

now about the next 2 hours of testing . Please print your name, date ,

and time on the front of this paper , and then, carefully read the

instructions . When you have done so, let me know. O.K.,

here is the list of adjectives which might describe how you feel about

the upcoming test. Please go down the list and check those words which

describe your present feelings .

The next exercise is designed to tell how well you can pick important

features out of a map or out of the real terrain. It ’s called the Witkin’s

Embedded Figures Test. Please come with me to where we can sit down

and be comfortable because this will take about 30 minutes .

(ADMINISTER EFT)

Now, I’d like you to study this little map . The yellow line indicates

the route you are to follow in your navigation exercise . Map study is

most effective when you note the relationship of the check points to the

surrounding terrain. For example , note that there are four legs in your

test route each ending at a checkpoint. Note also that the start point

is right near a road and about 200 meters south of an intersection. You

will also notice that the compass heading and distance are given for e.~

ch

leg of the route. Do you know how to use a compass? (IF NOT, GIVE BRIEF

INSTRUCTION) .

Do you know your pace count? ( IF S ANSWERS YES OR NO GIVE THEN THE

OPPORTUN ITY TO PACE ALONG TAP E MEASURE AND VERIFY WHAI HIS COUNT IS’ ~

)

O.K., now let me tell you what the basic procedure will be. When

we’re ready to go, I will lead you to the starting point. There, you

will inspect your map , shoot your azimuth and note your distance to be

traveled . When you are ready to begin just start and I will follow you .

As you walk the course , I will stop you every few minutes in order to take

a reading from the LORAN system (EXPLAIN 1’~

RAN IF NECESSARY). Since I

will be stopping you every so often , it quite possible that you will

lose your attention and forget your pace count. Please note this possibility

and try to prevent it from happening .

33
As you are traveling, you can stop as often as necessary to check your

compass. When you think you have reached the checkpoint , let me know .

REMEMBER Even though the start point is obviously marked with a

pile of rocks and a stake, t~ e checkpoints may not be so obivous .

Therefore , rely mostly on your compass and pace count , and use your map to

verify your position. DON ’ T RELY ON LOOKING FOR MAN-MADE MARKERS .

Do you have any questions?

O.K., please carefully study your map for the next few minutes

while I get prepared .

(AFTER 15 S HAVE BEEN RUN)

I want you to look at this (YAKIMA ORIENTATION TEST) and read the

instruction carefully because this is what I want you to fill out

when we finish the navigation exercise. (EXPLAIN CAREFULLY)

LAD’S GROUP: Because of special abilities which showed up in the tests

you took, you have been assigned to the experimental group which gets

to wear the night simulation devices. If you ’ll put on the protective

mask now , I’ll tell you how it works .

(PUT S ON MASK)

The lenses of the mask are treated with special coatings which

reduce the bright sunlight to the level of half moon . In a few minutes,

you will be able to see pretty well again. You ’ll notice that at the

bottom of each lens is a slit which appears a little brighter than the

rest. This is so you can read your map and compass, and so you can look

at the ground just in front of you so that you won ’t fall into holes or

something worse. This slit is not to be used ~o view straight ahead , but only to look d own . Now , I want you to sit down beside the goat for

a while so you can adapt to the darkness in peace (15 minutes).

NIGHT GROUP: Because of special abilities which showed up in the tests

you took, you have been assigned to the experimental group which gets to

work the night navigation problem .

DAY GROUP: Because of special qualities that showed up in the tests you

took , you have been assigned to our control group whose job is to set

standards for the others to follow.

34
DISTRIBUTION

ARI Distribution List

4 OASD (M&RA) 2 HOUSACDEC, Ft Ord, ATTN: Library

2 HODA (DAMI.CSZ) 1 HQUSACDEC, Ft Ord, ATT’N: ATEC—EX —E—Hum Factors

I HODA (DAPE.PBR) 2 USAEEC , Ft Beni.

~~sj n Herriton, ATTN: Lib rary

I HODA (DAMA-AR I 1 USAPACDC. Ft Benjamin Harrison , ATTN: ATCP—H R

I HODA (DAPE-HRE.FQ) 1 tISA Comm—Elect 5ch, FtMo nmo uth , ATTN: ATSN—EA

1 HQDA (SGRO-ID) I USAEC, Ft Moni~~uth , A’fl ’N: A MSEL—CT—HD P

1 HQQA (DAMI.DOT’C) I USAEC, Ft Mo~~

nouth , ATTN: AMSE L—PA—P

1 HQDA (DAPC-PMZ.A) 1 USAEC , Ft Monesouth, ATTN: AM$EL,—Sl—CB

1 HQOA (DACH-PPZ-A, 1 USAEC , Ft Monmouth, ATTN: C, Fad Div Br

1 HQOA (DAPE.HR€ ( 1 USA Materials Sys Anal Agcy, Aberdeen, ATTN: AMXSV—P

1 HODA (DAPE.MPO.C( I Edgewood Arien~ , Aberdeen, ATTN: SAREA—BL — H

1 HODA (DAPE-Dw l 1 USA Ord Ctr & 5th, Aberdeen, ATTN: ATSL—TEM—C

1 HODA (DAPE.HRL) 2 USA Hum Engr Lab, Aberdeen, ATTN: Library/D ir

1 HQDA (DAPE.CPS( 1 USA Combat Amis Tng Bd, Ft Benning, ATTN; Ad Supervisor

1 HQDA (DAFD-MFAI 1 USA Infantry Hwn Rich Unit , Ft Banning, ATTN: Chief

1 HODA IDARO.ARS.Pl I USA Infantry ~d. Ft Banning, ATTN: STEBC—TE—T

1 HODA (DAPC-PAS-Al 1 USASMA. Ft Bliss , AT’TN: ATSS—LRC

1 HODA (DUSA-OR) 1 USA Air Dci Sds. Ft Bliss , ATTN: ATSA—CTD --ME

1 HQDA (DAMO-RQR) 1 USA Air Oaf $di. Ft Bliss, ATTN : Tech Lib

1 HQDA (DASGI I USA Air Del Bd. Ft Bliss , ATTN: FILES

1 HODA (DAb -Ph 1 USA Air Oaf Bd , Ft Bliss , ATTN: STEBD—PO

1 Chi.f. Consult Div IDA-OTSGI, Adeiphi, MD I USA Cmd & General Sri Collage, Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: Lib

1 Mu Azat. Hum Res , ODDR&E , OAD IE&LSI 1 USA Cmd & General Stf College, Ft Leavenworth, ATTN: ATSW—SE—L

1 HO USARAL , APO Seattle , ATTN: ARACP R 1 USA Cmd & General Sri College . Ft Leavenworth , A11’N: Ed Advisor

1 HO Firtt Army, ATTh: AFKA-OI.Tl 1 USA Combined Aims Cmbt Day Act , Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: DepCdr

2 HO Fifth Army, Ft Sam Houston I USA Combined Anns Cmbt Dcv Act . Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: CCS

1 Dir , Army Sri Stsadie~ Oft , ATTN OA’

~CSA lDSP 1 USA Combined kms Cmbt Div Act , Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: ATCASA

1 Oft Chief of Sri, St udies Ofc 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbt Dcv Act , Ft Leavenwort h. A1’TN : ATCACC —E

1 DCSPER , AT’TN: CPS/OCP 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbt Day Act . Ft Leavenwor th , ATTN: ATCACC—Ct

I The Army Lb . Pentagon . ATT N RSB Chief 1 USAECOM . Ni~~

it Vision Lab , Ft Belvo ir , ATTN: AMSEL—NV—S D

I The A” i,y Lib , Pentagon . ATTN ANRAL 3 USA Compu ter S,’s CmO , Ft Belvoir , ATTN: Tech Library

1 Oft , Aut Sect of the Army (R&D ) 1 USAMEROC , Ft Selvo ir . ATTN STSFB—DQ

I Tech Suppor t Ofc , OJCS 1 USA Eng 5th, Ft Selvoi r . A TTN: L brary

1 USASA . Arlington , ATTN: lA RD~

T 1 USA Topographic Lab. Ft Balvoir , ATTN: ETL~~TD—S

1 USA Rich Oft , Durham , ATTN: Life Sciences Dir 1 USA Topographic Lab . Ft Belvo r . All N: STINFO Center

2 USARIEM , Natick . ATTN: SGRD.UE.CA 1 USA Topographic Lab , Ft Belvoir . ATTN ETL—GSI.

I USATTC. Ft Clayton . ATTN: STETC.MO-A 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch. Ft Huechuc a . ATTN : CTD—MS

1 USAIMA . Ft Bragg, ATTN: ATSU.CTD.OM 1 USA Intelli gence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , ATTN~ ATS—CTD—M S

I USAIMA . Ft Bragg, ATTN: Me~

quat Lib 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , ATTN : ATS I—TE

I US WAC Ctr & 5th. Ft McClellan . ATTN: Lib I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , ATTN: AT SI—TEX—G S

I US WAC Ctr & Sch, Ft McClellan , A TTN: Tng Dir 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huechu ca , ATTN: ATSI—CTS—OR

I USA Quartermaster Sch , Ft Lee , ATTN : ATSM.TE 1 USA lntehi.gence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca . ATTN: ATS I—CTD—DT

I Intelli gence Material Div Oft , EWL . Ft Hola bird 1 USA Intelli gence Ctr & Sch . Ft Huachuca , ATTN: ATSI—CTD—C5

1 USA SE Signal Sth , Ft Gordon, ATTN: ATSO EA I USA lntelhigenceCtr & Sch, Ft Huachuca , ATTN: DAS/SRD

1 USA Chaplain Cu & 5th . Ft Hamilton , ATTN: ATSC-TE-RD 1 USA lntelli ge rice Ctr & Sch. Ft Huachuc i . ATTN: ATS I—TEM

1 USATSCH , Ft Eust ii . ATTN : Educ Advi sor 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, Ft Huachuca . ATTN: Library

1 USA War College, Carlisle Barracks , A TTN : Lib I COP, HO Ft Huad~

uca , ATTN: Tech Ref Div

2 WRAIR , Neuropsychiatry Div 2 COR , USA Electr onic Pryg Grd , ATTN: STEEP—MT—S

I DLI, SDA. Monterey 1 HO, TCAT A. A’TTN: Tech Library

I USA Concept Anal Aqcy , Bethesda, A’fl’N: MOCA-MR 1 HO. TCATA . ATTh : AT CAT.OP.O. Ft Hood

1 USA Concept Anal Agcy. Bethesda , A’fl’N: MOCA.JF I USA Recruiting Cnrd, Ft Sheridan, A’fl’N: USARCPM.P

I USA Arctic Test Cu. APO Seattle, ATTN: STEAC.PL-Ml 1 Senior Army Ade., USAFAGOD/T AC, Elgin AF Aux FId No. 9

1 USA Arctic Test Cu, APO Seattle, ATTN: AMSTE-PL-1’5 I HO, USARPAC. DCSPER , APO SF 96558, ATTN: GPPE-SE

I USA Arma ment Cmd , Redstone Ars enal , A71’N: ATSK-TEM 1 Stlmion Lib, A~~~~my of Health Sciences, Ft Sam Houston

I USA Armament Cmd, Rock lilend , ATFN: AMSAR -TDC 1 Marine Corps h iss.. ATTN: Dean-MCI

I FAA’NAFEC. Atlantic City. ATTN: Library 1 HO, USMC. Comuiendent. A’TTN : Code MTMT

I FAA.NAFEC, Atlantic City. ATTN: Human Engr Br 1 HO. USMC. Coii

~~indant , ATTN : Code MPl-2O~

28

1 FAA Aeronautical Ctr, Oklahoma City, ATTN: AAC’44D 2 USCG Academy. New London, A’fl’N: Admission

2 USA FId Arty $ds, Ft Sill, ATTN: Library 2 USCG Academy. Maw London, A’fl’N: Library

I USA Armor 5th, Ft Knox, A’rrN: Library I USCG Tra4nlng Cs!, NY , ATTN: CO

I USA Armor 5th, Ft Knox , ATTN : ATSB-Dl-E 1 USCG Training Cs,. NY , AT1’N: Educ Sec Ofc

I USA Armor 5th, Ft Knox . AiTh: ATSB.DT-TP I USCG, Psythol Rea Br. DC, ATTh: GP 1/62

I USA Armor Sdi. Ft Knox , A’fl ’N: AT$8-CD’AO 1 HO Mld’Range ~~~, MC Oct . Quentico. ATTN: P&S Div

35 
1 US Marine Corps Liaison Ofc, AMC. Alexandria. ATTN: AMCGS—F 1 Oaf & Civil Inst of Enviro Medicine , Canada

I USATRADOC, Ft Monroe, AT1’N: ATRO—ED 1 AIR CRESS, Kensington, ATTN: Info Sys Br

6 USATRADOC, Ft Monroe, ATTN: ATP R—AD j Militaerpsykologisk Tierie,t., Copenhagen

1 USATRADOC. Ft Monroe, ATrN: ATTS—EA 1 Military Attache, French Embassy, ATIN: Dot Sec

I USA Forces Cmd. Ft Ud5hscson, ATTN: Library I Medscin Chat. C,E,R,P.A.—Arsenal. Taylor/Naval France

2 USA Aviation Test Bd, Ft Pucker, ATTN: STEBG—PC 1 Prin Scientific Oft, Appl Hum Engr Rich Div . Minist ry

1 USA Agcy for Aviation Safety, Ft Pucker , A’fl N: Libra ry of Defense. New Delhi

1 USA Agcy for Aviation Safety, Ft Pucker , ATTN: Educ Advisor 1 Pars Pith Oft Library, AKA . Israe l Defense Forces

1 USA Aviation Sd~, Ft Pucker, ATTN: P0 Drawer 0 1 Minusteris van Defansie, 000P/KL Aid Sociaal

I HQUSA Aviation Sys Cmd, St Louis, A’fl ’N: AM SAV—ZDR Psychologische Zaken , The Hague. Netherlands

2 USA Aviation Sys Test Act., Edward s AFB. A’fl’N: 5AVTE—T

1 USA Air Oaf Sch. Ft Bibe. AT1’N: ATSA TEM

1 USA Air Mobility Rich & Dcv Lab, Motfatt FId, A’fl’N: SAVOL—AS

I USA Aviation 5th. Re, Trig Mgt, Ft Pucker, ATTN: ATST—T—PTM

1 USA Aviation $ch. CO. Ft Pucker, ATIN: ATST—O—A

1 HO, DAPCOM . Alexandria, ATI’N: AMXCD—TL

I HO, DARCOM , Alexandria. A’fl ’N: COP

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

1 US Military Academy, West Point, ATTN: Ofc of Milt Ldrshp

1 US Military Academy, West Point, A’fl’N: MAOR

1 USA Standardization Gp, UK , FPO NY, A’fl ’N; MAS E—GC

1 (Ac of Naval Rich, Arlington. ATTN: Code 452

3 Oft of Naval R ich , Arlington, ATTN: Code 458

I Ofc of Naval Rich, Arlington, A’fl’N: Code 450

1 Ofc of Naval HICh, Arlington , ATTN: Code 441

I Naval Aeroepc t.~r-l Re, Lab, Pensacola , ATrN: Acous Sch Div

I Naval Aerospc Med Pet Lab, Pensacola, ATFN: Code L51

I Naval Aerospc Med Ret Lab, Pensacola , ATTN: Code L5

1 Chief of NavPers , ATTN: Par. OR

1 NAVAIRSTA , Norfolk , ATTN: Safety Cu

1 Nev Oceanographic, DC, A’fl’N: Code 6251, Charts & Tech

1 Center of Naval Anal, A’fl’N: Dot Ctr

1 NevAirSysCom, A’fl’N: AIR—53 13C

1 Nay BuMed, ATTN: 713

1 NavHelicopterSsib$qua 2, FPO SF 96601

I AFHPL (Fl’) Williams AFB

1 AFHRL ITT) Lowry AFB

1 AFHRL (AS) W RAPS, OH

2 AFHRL (00 (Z) $,rso ks AFB

1 AFHPL (DOJN) Lackland A FB

1 HOUSAF )INYSD)

1 HOUSAF (DPXXA)

1 AFVTG (P01 Randolph AFE

3 AMRL (HE) W PAFB , OH

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

1 ATC (XPTD) Randolph AFB

1 USAF A.roMed Lib, Brooks AFB (SUL—4). AT1’N: DOC SEC

1 AFOSP (NL). Arlington

1 AF log Cmd, McClellan AFB, ATTN: ALC/OPCR B

1 Air Force Academy, CO. ATIN: Dept of Sd Scn

5 NavPers & 0ev Cv . San Diego

2 Navy Med Neuropsychiatric Rich Unit, Sen Diego

1 Mae Electronic Lab, Sari Diego. ATTN: Ret Lab

1 Mae TrngCan. Sen Diego, ATTN: Code 9000— Lib

1 NevPoetGraSch , Monterey, ATTN : Ct

~ 55Aa

I NavPostGraSch, Monterey, ATTN: Code 2124

I NavTrngEquipCtr. Orlando, ATTN : Tech Lib

1 US Dept of Labor, DC, ATT’N: Manpower Admin

1 US Dept of Justice, DC, ATI’N: Drug Enforce Admin

1 Nat Bur of St,ondards, DC, ATTN: Coniputer Info Section

I Nat Clearing House for MH—Info , Rockvills

1 Denver Federal Ctr, Lak.wood. ATTN: BLM

12 Defense Documentation Center

4 Dir Psych, Army Hq, Russell Ofcs. Canberra

1 Scientific Mew . PAil Sd. Army H~ , ~

‘4ussell Ofes, Canberra

1 PAil arid Air Attache, Austr ian Emb.sey

1 Centre de Recherche Dee Facteuri, Hurnaine tie a Defense

National., Baiseehs

2 Canadian Joint Staff Washington

I C/Air Staff, Royal Canadian AF , ATIN: Pare Std Anal Br

3 Chief, Cwadian Oaf Rich Staff. ATI’N: C/CRDSIW)

4 Sr$tials Def Staff , Brutish Embaaey, Waalsinroes

36