Ii1IIPII

~ _

ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE EVALUATION OF

AUTOMATED DATA ON INSTRUCTIONAL

TECHNOLOGY (ADIT) E

c

~ 

~~~~~~

‘

•

~~ • .\

.

~~~~~~~~~

.

. . ~~~~~~~~~

- —

‘ ~~~~~ Beatrice J parr

“

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY & TRAINING SIMULATION TECHNICAL AREA

L~’rJ

U. S. Army

Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

August 1978

Approved tnr public rel,’ is, il,Slrit) utiofl unlum ,t i’d,

‘

~9 ~:i .

~~~~~~~~~ 031

- 5.

~~~~~~~
U. S . ARMY RESEARCH INSTI T UT E

FOR TH E BEHAVIORAL AN D SOCIAL SCI ENC ES

A Fteld Operating A gency under the Jurisdiction of the

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

W ILLIAM L. HAUSER

JOSEPH ZEIDNER Colonel , US Army

Technical Director (Desi gnate) Commander

is

NOTICES

DISTRIBUTION Primary distribution of this report has been made by ARI. Please address correspondence

concerning distribution of reports to: U. S Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences .

ATTN PERI P . ~OO1 Eisenhowe r Avenue . Alexandria , Virginia 22333

fiNAL DISPOSITION This report may be destroyed when it is no longer needed. Please do not return it to

the U S. Army Research IflstitUt

~ for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

IL The findings in thiS report are not to be construed as an official D,p.rsment of the Army position .

unlesS so designated by other euthoriied documents.

.4
-

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

~~~~~

‘-

~~~~

‘

~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(I . Un classified \..

‘ 

t// ~ t-- /

SECuRITY CLASSIFICATIO N OF THIS PAGE (Wh en Data Entere d) L

DEDas

~

1. IIu~~ iJ1 A rIflkI DAr S E READ INSTRUCTIONS 5’~ F iJF~~I ~J~

JWM I

~ I P. I I

~

.#J~ BEFORE COMPLET IN G FORM

•

~ 

I, NWrOIST tJUMB~~~ -. 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO. 3. RECiP IENTS CATALOG NUMBER

/ Technical Paper.~317 ____________________________

~ TIYL F (

~~ d ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _ . 5. TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED

ARMY RESEA RCH INSTITUT E EVALUATI ON OF

_AUTOMATED DATA ON INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY --

(A) 6. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

7. AuTHOR (.) B . CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER( o)

1/ /‘~~~ trice 

~~~ --

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAM E AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT . T A SK .

~— •REA & WORK UNIT NUMBERS

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behaviora’. .

and Social Sciences . “ /2Ql6lic52B74F. . 

,

~ ,

‘ -

5001 Eisenhower Avenue , Alexandria , VA 2233 3 /

I I . CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS .

‘

~~~~ 4 Rcrpn~ -o*r-f’— --’

Army Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel • / ~ 

7Auq~~ L~~~ 78

Washington , DC 20310 ~~~~~~~~~~~ 

‘~ NUMBER OFPAGtS

14. MON ITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS(I1 dilfe ,eni fro ~~~~jp,g Office) 15. SECURITY CLASS. (of thi. r.port)

/ ~~~~ : / Unclassified

I / 15.. DECLASSIFICATION /DOWNGRADING

SCHEDULE ——

16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (o (thfe R.po.’C)

Approved for public release ; distribution unlimited .

Ii . DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of (he ebaira ct .ntered ln Block 20 , ft ditMi’en f from R.po,t)

IC. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

IS. KEY WORDS (Continue on revere. dde if nece.Iusy end Identify by blo ck numi,er)

Instruct ional technology

Computerized data base

Evaluation

Training research

20. A8ST4~~CT (CenIInuC en revere. dde if fl•CSCS V end Identify by block n.m.b.r)

7~utomated Data on Instructional Technology (ADIT) is a computerized file

of technical information on instruction and learning. It has been supported

by the three services and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Aqency. The

database consists of very detailed evaluative abstracts of reports , articles ,

etc. relating to training and instructional system development. A small—scale

evaluation of ADIT was conducted . The evaluation assessed the usefulness of

records obtained from the data base , the ease of on-line data retrieval , and

the stand—alone quality of the ADIT Guide to Use. Seven research psychologist

DO ~~~~~~ 

~473 EDITION OF t NOV 66 IS OBSOLETE~~ Un classified

SEC%J.tJY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (VIxen Data Ent.,.d) 

.,—_ T~

’T.~ I
Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PA G .(W1~w Dec. En(

~rwa,

20.

read the ADIT Guide to Use , performed search strategy exercises , performed the

ADIT operations test , arid completed two questionnaires evaluating ADIT and the

ADIT Guide to Use.

Attitudes toward the ADIT system were generally favorable Participants

felt that the system would be useful to educational researchers , administrators, planners , and developers. The abstracts were thought to be comprehensive

participants believed that data could be retrieved more quickly from ADIT tha n

from either original sources or alternative data bases.

Attitudes toward the ADIT Guide to Use were less favorable. Participants

indicated that the guide did not contain adequate information , the instructions

were not written with sufficient clarity, and the questions in the exercises

were of limited usefulness. Responses to questionnaires and protocol analysis

of participants ’ operations test revealed that most of the problems encountered

and many of the errors on the test were probably attributable to shortcomings

in the guide . Suggestions for revisions are included.

ç

~~~ .~~

2:_— — 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

~

\

~~:

y ~~~~~~~~~~ 

- 

- 

-

Unclassified

~EC~~RITY CLASSI FtC - ~~~ ‘ . ‘ 

-

~ 
—--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

- - -

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

—-

~~~~

- —-- — ,

. - --

~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

Technical Paper 317

ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE EVALUATION OF - - AUTOMATED DATA ON INSTRUCTIONAL

TECHNOLOGY (ADIT)

Beatrice J. Farr

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY & TRAINING SIMULATION TECHNICAL AREA

Submitted as complete and Approved By: technically accurate, by:

James D. Baker Aft Bicnbaum, Acting Director

Technical Area Chief ORGANIZATIONS AND SYSTEMS

RESEARCH LABORATORY

Joseph Zeidner

TECHNICAL DIRECTOR (DESIGNATE)

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

5001 Eisenhowe r Avenue , Alexandria , Virginia 22333

Office , Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

Department of the Army

August 1978

Army Project Number Educational Concepts

20161102B74F and Evaluation

Approved for public release; distnbution unhimst.d.

-- 

~~ - 

--- ---- -

--~ 

. 

-~
-- 

—~~~~~ —--~ - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -

~~~~ =.-- - -

~~~~~~~~--- —

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
-

~ 

-

--

~~~~~~

,. _

~~~~~~~~~~~~~

_ _ -. :-

~~~~~~

- _ - - 

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

FOREWO RD

The Educational Technology and Training Simulation Technical Area of

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

conducts research to support tralining concepts , instructional system development , and technology assessment.

One system being considered to facilitate dissemination of research

results in these areas is the Automated Data on Instructional Technology

(ADIT) System. ADIT development was initiated by the Air Force Human Resources Laboratory (AFHRL) and has been jointly funded by AFHRL , ARI , the

Navy Personnel Research and Development Center (NPRDC) , arid the Defense

Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA ) since FY 75. ADIT is subsumed

under Air Force Office of Scientific Research Project 2313 , “Human Resources Task 3, Human Factors in System Design .” ~~~~ portion of the effort

is funded as part of ARI project 2Q7611O1S74F , “Personnel Performance and

Training .”

Although the full system will not be completed until FY 79, a preliminary evaluation was requested by the Office of the Director of Defense

Research and Engineering .

Special thanks go to Mr. John Ferguson , ARI Librarian , for his cons iderable assis tance during the conduct of this eva luation.

~~~~~~EPH~~~~~~NER

chnical Director (Desi gnate)

——--

~~~~~~~~~ 

- . —~~~~~- .:L__ —
— . —_- —.-. - —- ----- ,.---,----- 

~~~~~~~~~~

--

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-----_------ _, , . -

~

__— 

______ ,~~

ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE EVALUATION OF AUTOMATED DATA ON INSTRUCTIONAL

TECHN OLOGY (ADIT)

BRI EF

Requirement:

To conduct a “limited” test for assessing the comparative usefulness

of the records in Automated Data on Instructional Technology (ADIT) . An

integral part of this effort was to evaluate :

1. The stand-alone quality of the ADIT Guide to Use and

2. The ease of on—line data retrieval.

The objective was to provide an assessment of the User ’s Guide and operations for retrieving information from the data base , as well as recommendations for improvement of both if necessary.

Pro cedures :

Seven research psychologists , grades GS-ll and 14, participated in

the study . Each performed a series of tasks that included :

1. Reading the ADIT Guide to Use ,

2. Performing search strategy exer cises ,

3. Performing the ADIT Operations Test, and

4. Completing two questionnaires : (a) Evaluation of ADIT Guide

to Use and (D) Evaluation of ADIT . 4

One briefing session was held , during which participants were told

the purpose of the evaluation and taught how to operate the two terminals

used in the study . All participants kept logs to record the time spent

both in off—line reading and preparation of search strategies , as well as

in actual ...ata retrieval. Participants were encouraged to provide written

suggestions for improving the data base itself , methods for accessing information , and the User Guide Format .

The ADIT operations test was a 10—part , self—administered on-line

test that sough t to determine the efficiency of the student’s search

strategies and the appropriateness of the choices of segments to be

displayed . Scoring was based upon guidelines provided by AFHRL . The
-- — —.- - —- - —-. -.---~------ - - — -~

----.

- .-.- -:-, 

questionnaires that evaluated the guide and evaluated the ADIT system

used a 10—interval scale wi th a centered zero reference . Measurements

were taken to the nearest whole number .

Findings :

1. The attitudes toward the ADIT system per se were generally

favora~

ble . Participants felt that the system would be particularly useful for educational researchers, administrators ,

planners , and developers .

2. The information in ADIT files was found to be comprehensive

and useful. Participants believed that data could be retrieved from ADIT more quickly than from either original

sources or alternative data bases , such as Defense Documentation Center (DDC).

3. Attitudes toward the ADIT Guide to Use were less favorable .

Participants indicated that (a) the Guide did not contain sufficient information , (b) the instructions were not written

with sufficient clarity, and (c) the questions in the exercises were of limited usefulness.

Utilization of Findings :

Responses to the questionnaires, as we ll as p rotocol an alysis of

participants ’ operations tests, revealed that most of the problems encountered and most of the errors on the test were attributable to shortcomings in the User ’s Guide . It was generally believed that a more

meaningful evaluation of the system itself could be conducted if the

guide were revised to incorporate some of the suggested modifications.

It is anticipated that the recommendations for improvement of the User ’ s

Guide that emerged from this effort will be incorporated with those from

concurrent AFHRL and NPRDC evaluat ions to produce a revised User ’s Guide .

One of the specific recommendations made in this report has already

been accomplished : namely, the system now permits the use of arithmetic

operators in segment 28.

4
- ~~~~~~~~~ -—- .—-—-— - -.-,-- ~~~~~~~~~~ —-,------.--- 

-

ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE EVALUATION OF AUTOMATED DATA ON INSTRUCTIONAL

TECHNOLOG Y (ADIT)

CONTENTS

Page

INTRODUCTION 1

BACKGROUN D 

DESCRIPTION OF ADIT GUIDE TO USE 2

ADIT EVALUATION 3

Procedure 3

Findings 4

CONCLUSIONS 10

APPENDIX A ADIT OPERATION TEST 13

B EVALUATION OF ADIT 17

C EVALUATION ‘)F GUIDE TO USE 25

DISTRIBUTION 33

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. ADIT operations test scores 5

2. Scores and means for evaluation of ADIT questionnaire 7

3. Scores and means for evaluation of ADIT Guide to Use . 7
~~~ — :

~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE EVALUATION OF AUTOMATED DATA

ON INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY (ADIT)

INTRODUCTION

Automated Data on Instructional Technology (ADIT), which began in

May 1974, is a computerized file of technical (research) information on

instruction and learning for use by anyone within the Department of Defense involved with Training and instructional System Development (ISD).

The Air Force Human Resources Laboratory (AFHRL ) is accomplishing the

effort with support from the Air Force Office of Scientific Research .

Additional participative support has been provided by the Army Research

Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI), the Navy Personnel Research and Development Center (NPRDC) , and the Defense Advanced

Research Projects Agency (DARPA) .

The file consists of exceptionally detailed evaluative abstracts

of technical reports, journal articles , books , etc., relating to training

and ISD. Each entry contains up to 35 pieces of information in addition

to the abstract and normal bibliographic citation . These abstracts are

intended to be so comprehensive that original sources will be unnecessary

for most purposes.

Access to the file is via an on—line , interactive , full-text retrieval system (INFOCEN) located at Wright—Patterson Air Force Base .

Any dial-up terminal of common configuration may be used , with the only

added expense being telephone toll charges . (Later plans call for making ADIT available less expensively through commercial nets.)

Nearly 11,000 abstracts are on-line , with 500 more scheduled for in—

clusion by 1 October 1978. It is estimated that the total system will

consist of 14,000 entries . After the initial phase , a capability will

be added for using the data base to obtain prescriptive guidance . The

last phase will include refinements that will permit users to query the

system about specific instructional design issues , using constrained

natural language interaction . Once the system becomes functional , additional relevant information (not yet formally reported ) will be included as part of the updating and file maintenance process.

BACKGROUND

On 10 June 1976 the office of the Director of Defense Research and

Engineering requested an evaluation of the potential usefulness of the

ADIT system. An evaluation team , consisting of one member from each

participating organization (AFHRL, ARI , and NPRDC) was convened to draw

up an evaluation plan . Given the limited time , personnel , and funding

resources , it was agreed that a small-scale test be conducted to examine

the utility of ADIT files , the ease of on-line retrieval , and the value

1

~~~lIli ji — 

~~~ . — — —i- 

~~ f~~’- ’——--
of the ADIT Guide to Use as a teaching instrument . The gu ide , operations test, and two questionnaires used in the evaluation were developed

by AFHRL . An eff ort would be made to obtain , whenever possible , subjects who would represent different types of users. In the case of ARI ,

no persons experienced in school instruction (and only one experienced

in instructional technology ) were available . None had ever had any direct responsibility for planning, developing, or managing military instruction , but all had been involved in training—related research.

Essentially , the sample was composed of individuals with advanced degrees in psychology .

DESCRIPTION OF ADIT GUIDE TO USE

The ADIT Guide was prepared as a stand—alone , self—instructional

text. Several instructional features have been included as appendixes.

The guide contains a section that describes the system and others that

give general procedures for starting up, signing in , searching, retrieving , processing , and terminating . More complex operating procedures are

handled in later sections of the text . These include several strategies,

e.g. , formulating the request and organizing the output , browsing, modifying requests , etc. The appendixes contain a complete listing of all

ADIT file segment numbers (with explanatory notes) , a directory of general terms , review questions on system description and procedures , a

checklisc for initial practice operation , and 10 practice search prob—

lens with sugge sted solutions.

ADIT EVALUATION

Procedure

Each participant was given a copy of the User ’ s Guide and a set of

forms to complete , including a log for time spent both on—line and of fline . All subjects were required to perform the same series of tasks.

The sequence was specified , but moderate departure s, because of scheduling problems , etc. , were anticipated , and allowances were made for them .

The scheduled activities are listed below in the suggested order of

performance :

1. Complete an “ADIT Evaluation Participition Record .”

2. Read the ‘ ADIT Guide to Use” to page 28.

3. Perform the “Checklist for Initial Practice Operation ” (Appendix

D of the guide) .

4. Complete reading the “ADIT Guide to Use. ”

5. Perform the search strategy exercise in Appendix E of the Guide

• and verify solutions at the terminal.

2 

- — -- - -~~~~~ • __________
—P6. Perform the “ADIT Operation Tes t.”

7. Complete the questionnaire , “Evaluation of the “ADIT Guide to

Use.”

8. Work up to 30 minutes on self—identified problem(s) of personal interest.

9. Complete the questionnaire , “Evaluation of ADIT.”

Seven sc ientists (research psychologists , GS—ll and 14) participated

in the evaluation. None had any previous experience with on-line accessing of data bases , but they had at least limited experience with computer

systems . One briefing session was held , during which the participants

were informed about the nature of evaluation , and materials were distributed (see appendixes). An experienced user of the ADIT system was onsite

at all times during the evaluation period . The only assistance offered ,

however , was to refer individuals seeking guidance to the appropriate

pages in the Guide , in addition to providing procedural information with

regard to operation of the terminal .

Ideally , each participant was to set aside two consecutive working

days to perform the bulk of the activities . In actual practice , this did

not prove possible ; therefore, the period of performance ranged from 10

to 15 days.

Experienced users from AFHRL , Wright— Patterson Air Force Base , ad—

vised that actual time spent at the terminal during any given session

should be approximately 30 minutes. Because it frequently took that long

just to establish contact with Data Central , it was not unusual for participants to spend 2 or more hours during each sitting at the terminal.

There is no way to determine accurately the extent to which this may have

affected performance in terms of accuracy and efficiency . Expediency

dictated , however , that this was the only way to accomplish the work

within a reasonable time frame.

The evaluation plan called for each user to work independently at

all times. Because of the press of other activities and the availability

of only two terminals , it was occasionally necessary for two or more researchers to work together , especially during the practice exercises . To

ins’ire that researchers had worked out the search strategies on their own ,

a joint input was made at the terminal only after it was determined that

these search plans were essentially identical. In such cases , the time

spent was recorded for each participant. Every attempt was made to reduce or eliminate biasing of the experimental results.

3

~~~ J&__~ •

~~~.~~~~~~~~~~ •_ • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ --- 

. 

-——.. . -- . -

~

-

~~~ - • __j_
-‘I’

Find in gs

Operations Test. The operations test was a job-performance test

intended for evaluating prof iciency in the use of ADIT. Thirteen tasks

were included (see Appendix A). Instructions called for participants

to formulate a sear ch strategy , select segments to display, and , where

called for , perform the search and record the answers. Different questions had different point values , depending upon the complexity of the

task. Maximum possible score was 60. Part of the test required participants to plan and execute a search strategy on a topic of their own

choosing , a task that most found quite difficult. Table 1 shows the

scores for each question , the total score for each participant , and the

total time each spent performing all the formal requirements for the

study.

A comparison of scores on the operations test with total amount of

time spent indicates that, for the most part, higher scores were associated with more time spent in study and practice. Final scores ranged

from 37 to 55, with a mean of 45.9. All particpants lost at least some

points as a result of not following instructions completely in all

instances.

Most participants appeared to find questions 1, 2 , 3 , 5, and 8 rela—

tively easy . As the questions became more complex , though , the number

and variety of errors increased.

Careful examination of the participant—response protocols often

yielded clues as to probable causes of confusion . Errors tended to be

consistent across subjects and , in many instances , could be at least

partially traced to ambiguities or omissions in the guide .

Question 6 proved difficult , possibly because most participants

failed to enter appropriate alternative search terms .

The greatest variability was manifested in questions 9a-9d . The

total number of answers provided by the system was larqely a function

of whether participants entered their search statements via modifications. A particular problem area was question 9d, which the scoring

key treated as a modification when actually it might have been more productive to enter a completely new search statement.

Performance was notably poor on question 10, which required participants to design and carry out a detai led search plan on individualized training. Examination of responses seemed to indicate that

participants had not mastered the skills needed to perform a thorough

s€~

arch . During postevaluation debriefing sessions , however, it becamc

evident that at least part of the poor performance could be ascribed

to lack of enthusiasm for the task rather than lack of abi lttv .

4 

_ __ 

i
:

_

~~~~~~~~~~~~

‘

.

D .n a)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0

S o U )~~~ m U ) m~~~~~~o~ o mmm a)

000000Lfl O Lf l U) 0 01n 0 c N .

e’ e’ ~~ U) c’~ U) in -i ci e’ c~ ‘~~ ~~ o

‘-4

O O L n m 0 0 0 0 0L f l O O ( N U) 0

‘

.0 . N

U) ~~‘ (N (N N (N N 10 (fl (N N ~~‘ ~~ (N N

a)

I-’0

C-) U,

O 0 0 Lfl~~~~~ON0 min0 0’.0 0 10 LO . H U) ~~‘ ~~‘ (‘> C’) (N 0 C’) 10 H N C’) C’) H N Lt)

m

~~

a) >4) >4)

5 -4->

.Q 0 0 0000000000000 0 10 f

~ .~~ E-4 .4-> -C e’ ‘e ‘.0 if> C’) e ~~ ‘ in m m e’ in In in I

~

r)

in

a) U)

0 0 100000L O O L 0 0 0 U) 0 0 C’) ,

H ~~~ (N~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ (N10 O\ ‘.0 o

000L 0000000L 000 0 (N (N . Q

~~~~~~ 1⁄4~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ( N N C’ )if) (N “i’ ‘-1

H

00i00 000001n001n in N H .

~~~~~~~~~~~~~m t ) ’.o L n ( N( N e’Ln 0 0 (N in H

a)

4-1 ‘05 O

o

(4) 4J rLy’ S O S S H 0 n ‘.4 ~~J (fl ’.4 a) Ci 4-) 

~~~~~~ O O 0 >,Q~~~ U) 4->

(I) H N C’) e ’ U )’ . c N m m o)a ) mo E~

> a)’0 .>~ ~ a) H

04 E

~~ s e4i E

5
Evaluation of ADIT. Participants each completed a 12—part questionnaire that evaluated the ADIT system and operating procedures.

Table 2 provides summary scores and means for all questions that used

numerical ratings . Scoring was along a 10—interval scale with a centered zero reference , measured to the nearest whole number. A complete

listing of all questions and responses can be found in Appendix B.

Procedures for using ADIT were rated as relatively simple (ques—

• tion 1, Appendix B). Estimates regarding the amount of time needed for

practice at the terminal (in order to become proficient in the use of

ADIT) ranged from a low of 1 hour to a high of 40 hours (question 2,

Appendix B). The system records obtained during the test were rated as

more than adequate for use in reviewing research on the topics involved

(question 3, Appendix B). Additional comments by participants , however ,

indicated a strong personal preference for ref erring to original documents , particularly for the most directly relevant materials . This is

less a criticism of the system than a predictable bias of professional

researchers in favor of original sources. Participants thought that

the records contained information that would be equally useful to planners of service training courses and to those reviewing research (question 4, Appendix B).

All participants indicated that if they had ready access to a terminal , they would use its services. Frequency estimates ranged from

one to eight times a month , and time estimates varied from 5 minutes to

3 hours (question 5, Appendix B).

On topics relating to instructional design , ADIT was seen as offering a very appreciable savings in time over both conventional library

searches and the DDC (question 6, Appendix B).

Participants felt that when the document coverage is completed , the

records would be somewhat useful to personnel involved in administering ,

planning , and developing instructional systems and devices , but more useful to DOD researchers in instructional technology (questions 7 and 8,

Appendix B). Modifying the system to permit querying ADIT for principles

• relating to instructional design and for specific recommendations on particular problems in that area was thought to be of more value to researchers than to administrators , planners , or developers (questions 9a and 9b ,

Appendix B). Asked to indicate support for ADIT ~

is a taxpayer rather

than a scientist , participants tended to favor rather than object to the

project (question 10, Appendix B).

Evaluation of ADIT Guide to Use. Each partici pant com~~1 t t ’~d an

eight—part questionnaire that evaluated the ADIT Guide t c Use . Table 3

provides summary scores and means for all questions that used numerical

ratings. Scoring was also along a 10—interval scale. A complete listing of all questions and responses can be found in Appendix C. Pages

1—28 contain the fundamental operating procedures for ADIT. Participants

spent a mean of 76 minutes reading this portion of the guide (question

la , Appendix C).

6
Table 2

Scores and Means for Evaluation of ADIT Questionnaire

Subjects —

Question 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 X a

1 6 5 5 3 5 3 8 5.0 1.73

3 5 — 8 5 6 7 1 5.3 2.42

4 4 — 8 7 5 — 1 5.0 2.74

7 6 9 9 6 8 8 3 7.0 2.16

8 6 9 8 4 6 5 3 5.9 2.11

9 4 7 7 8 9 — — 7.0 1.87

9R 6 9 9 6 8 — 3 6.8 2.32

10 6 8 7 6 7 9 2 6.4 2.22

X = 5.4 7.8 7.6 5.6 6.8 6.4 3.0

o = .92 1.6 1.30 1.59 1.49 2.4 2.38

Table 3

Score and Means for Evaluation of ADIT Guide to Use

Subjects —

Question 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 X

2 5 6 4 3 3 4 2 3.9 1.35

3 5 5 3 4 5 2 5 4.1 1.21

4 3 2 3 4 5 3 5 3.6 1.13

5 5 7 6 5 8 6 7 6.3 1.11

7 3 1 2 4 4 9 3 3.7 2.56

8 3 6 3 4 8 1 7 4.6 2.51

X = 4.0 4.5 3.5 4.0 5.5 4.2 4.8

a = 1.09 2.43 1.38 .63 2.07 2.93 

2.047
Appendix D of the guide (Checklist for Initial Practice Operation)

took a mean of 108 minutes to complete , with a range of 42 to i75 minutes (question ib , Appendix C).

Although the findings show that participants spent an average of

115 minutes to complete readin g the guide (question lc , Appendix C),

this could be an underestimate because it may not reflect all of the

time spent looking up information following the initial reading. Participants stated that because this time was spent at irregular intervals ,

the logs may not document accurately all time spent.

Appendix E of the guide contained 10 practice search problems . Although the guide offered assistance in the form of suggested solutions ,

the amount of time spent suggests that participants opted to try their

own solutions (question ld , Appendix C). The task that took longest to

perform was the operations test; mean time was 382 minutes (question le ,

Appendix C). All participants reported a need to refer to the guide

frequently during the course of the test . In many instances , several

attempts were made on questions before an answer was deemed satisfactory .

A wide range of topics was selected by participants as areas to

work on purely for self—interest. Times for this activity ranged from

5 minutes to more than 1-1/2 hours (question lf , Appendix C).

The clarity of the guide (for purposes of learning) was rated relative to similar materials. Ratings were closer to the “very confusing ”

end of the scale than they were to the “very clear” portion (question 2,

Appendix C). The length of the guide was seen as somewhat “too short”

(question 3, Appendix C), and the information provided was considered

“too little ” (question 4, Appendix C).

The guide was also seen as being deficient in terms of providing

the i.-formation necessary to use ADIT at the terminal (question 8, Appendix ‘. ‘ In spite of these shortcomings , however , it was felt that

an individual who had mastered the guide would be reasonably competent

to operate the ADIT system (question 5, Appendix C). Estimates for how

much time should be spent studying the guide by an individual with no

compute r experience but with some knowledge of training ranged from 2

to 3 hours to as mC-’ch as 8 hours (question 6, Appendix C).

Questions in Appendix C of the guide were not viewed as being particularly valuable in learning the materials (question 7, Appendix C).

Problems Encountered. Perhaps the most frustrating aspect of the

ADIT evaluation was the long delays experienced in gaining access to

the data base . Certain problems were apparently due to faulty communication lines , particularly the Autovon lines. Waiting periods of 15 to

30 minutes or more were not uncommon , especially in the mornings and

late afternoons. Consequently , the tasks took much longer to comp lete

than originally anticipated. During a considerable portion of the evaluation period , there were many system buqs. For example , answers wou l

i8
.

1

be rejected upon initial entry, only to be accepted upon reentry . The

system also would refuse occasionally to accept the 10—digit code number , and at times it would accept a typed—out name for a segment but not

the corresponding code number .

There were times when the system responded “missing operator” when ,

in fact, none was missing. At other times , the system would , in the middle of an operation, return to file without having been instructed to do

so. With great regularity , complex search statements would cause the

system to respond , “your request is being processed” repeatedly, untii

the user would hand up in frustration and start over again . Sometimes,

a complex request would yield “no entries ” or “too much information given ”

when the very same request entered by way of modification would produce

answers . The preceding discussion of problems clearly suggests a need

for further debugging and a mechanism for monitoring the system to minimize such problems in the future .

The following summarizes the most frequently occurring comments regarding deficiencies in the User ’s Guide :

The use of quotation marks is confusing. The guide frequently puts

quotation marks around words to be entered as responses , although the

quotes are not to be entered . It would be helpful if this were stated

clea rly in the guide.

Obeying the instructions (p. 32) for entering the name of an author

(using the initials for greater precision) in some instances yielded fewer responses than just the author ’s last name alone. In the worst case ,

entering an author ’s name and initials would produce “no response ” when

there were , indeed , one or more answers when the last name was entered

alone . This proved annoying to users who assumed that the guide ’s directions were the best ones to use .

The guide did not indicate that the six arithmetic operators do not

work for file segment 28 (date). Examination of partic 1 i~int protocols

reveals that everyone made the same erroneous assumption reqa ding segment 28. The guide is also not clear on how to proceed when tee system

responds as if a perfectly legitimate segment name were invalid , nor

does it indicate which statements are acceptable after the system responds , “will attempt to continue .” This resulted in a frequently fruit—

less trial—and—error process.

At one point in the guide , users were told that a search request

could be modified by entering , “MODIFY” (see p. 22). There is, in addition , a recursive command , “$$MODIFY ,” which returns the system to the

message “ADD NUMBER XXX MODIFICATION .” The difference between these cornmands , if any , should be specified . Moreover , it is not apparent why the

system occasionally rejected “MODIFY ,” following the system response :

“How do you want to process them?” which according to the guide is appropriate at this point in the search process.9
-. --.

The guide should specif ically state that con trol mus t be retur ned

to the system after the end of output for a query and also after each

page of printout . It is not at all clear what is required when the system says “Reply.” There is also a need to state , more precisely , that

• if only one sorting is desired , control must be returned . As it is, the

ini tial reaction of al l participants in this eva luation was to th ink

there had been an error when the system came back the second time with

“ENTER SORT SEGMENT , LENGTH, MODE .”

Participants expressed a general feeling that Appendix C (review

questions) should have a greater proportion of prac tical operational

questions , and fewer theoretical , system , or nomenclature items. Participants also indicated that the Sample Search Plan on page 57 should

be expanded to include the exact search request to be input. Because

there is some confusion about appropriate procedures for using connectors

in compound requests , there would be considerable merit in providing a

complete example in the guide . Indeed , the consensus was that a few

complete protocols , at appropriate points , would improve the clarity of

instructions greatly. This was especially true for comp’ex search

statements .

A universal complaint was that the recursive command “$$Wl-IAT”

(which should provide a tutorial message that helps explain what the

user is doing wrong ) generally failed to clarif y the problem and , in

some instances , actually contributed to further operator confusion . It

was felt that truly useful tutorials should not simply indicate the nature of the error but , more important , should offer specific , detailed

guidance on corrective actions .

The suggested solutions for questions in Appendix E were a potential

source of confusion primarily because the abbreviated format bore no resemblance to the correct method for inputting . Participants felt that

all references to message entry format should appear in the guide exactly as they would be entered on the keyboard .

CONCLUSIONS

There was unanimous agreement that the inclusion of an i~ dex would

appreciably reduce the amount of time spent looking up information in

the guide. Users indicated frequent frustration when explanatory information on a known topic was not able to be located rapidly . This was

experienced particularly when participants were working at a terminal.

It was felt that the guide would be improved by having several exercises in which a user is stepped through a problem , e.g., shown what

happens as a search is expanded or narrowed , or shown how to truncate

and browse sensibly. A section or> common errors and how to avoid them

would be equally profitable.

10

__ - -
— ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -

~~-,-—-- -~ ~~~~~~~~~ ---•---—. - - —-__--~ ~

--•---- - --- -- -.

~~~~~~~ :_

-- —- — —..--,.-, —- ‘

Among the system features listed as most desirable were (a) the

addition of a break command which would permit users to enter a new request whenever the system was taking an inordinate amount of time processing a request; (b) the ability to use arithmetic operators in segment

28; and (c ) the poss ibili ty of ask ing the system to look for certain

words in more than one segment without having to repeat the terms or

segment numbers .

11

—---

~ 

. -- . • ~~•
~~~~~~~~~~~~—- 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

APPENDIX A

ADIT OPERATION TEST

This is a job—performance test intended for evaluating proficiency

in the use of ADIT. It should be completed within about three hours.

To take the test you will need (1) this test form , (2) an ADIT Sear ch

Plan form , (3) some scratch paper and (4) use of a computer terminal

with associated printer and capability of reaching the ADIT computer.

In comp leting the test , first go throug h the questions , in sequence ,

planning the necessary searches and displays. Record these in the

spaces provided following the questions (on the Search Plan for Item

10). Then go to the terminal and carry out the necessary activities

there. When printouts are requested , print i the first page. Save

the complete printout of your activities and display s, but record your

answers on this form where requested. If yo u sear ch or d isplay differ ent ly

than you had planned , circle the appropriate symbol “S” or “D” to indicate

that. Finally, give the test , your search plan , and the complete printout

to the person responsible for the test.

Your test will be scored by a point system in which items range

from 3 to 6 points in value and the maximum obtainable is 60. Record

your t imes below :

Started planning : Started terminal:

Stopped planning : Stopped terminal:

1. Get a chronologica l listing of items authored by Cagne.

S:

0:

-

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

-

~~~~

-

— -
2. How many records in ADIT from AC 4000 to AC 6000 inclusive were

published in 1950?

S:

D:

Answer:

3. Get the references to some good quality general discussions of

transfer of training . List them alphabe tically by author.

S:

0:

4. Wha t records invol~ ed use of the Army Genera l Classification Test

(AGCT) ? Are any of the source documents in the Defense Documentation Center collection? If so , include the DDC number with the

ADIT AC number.

S:

Answer:

5. Wha t descriptive terms best represent the top ics of AC 4170?

S:

Answer:

14

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

~~~~~~~ ---~~• --~~ w~~-

~ —-- ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ -- • . —.

~ 

--- 

~~

—— !. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ 

—,—-—-----.---- 

-‘

- - • . - --- • •~~~~~~~

6. What additional research do authors of articles on feedback after

1973 suggest needs to be done? Make a single listing of only those

references which do provide suggestions , and include the suggestions.

S:

D:

7. What did Bourne and Archer conclude in 1956 from their research on

distribution of practice? How did the abstractor feel about their

article?

A:

D:

Answer:

8. Was the 1973 article by Levin on cue validity government—supported?

If so , by wha t organization?

S:

0:

Answer:

9a. How many records in ADIT have titles suggesting that they concern

programmed learning?

S:

Answer:

15
___

9b. How many of those are research studies?

S:

D:

Answer:

9c. Prepare a bibliography of those programmed learning studies which

are concerned with technical training .

S:

D:

9d. Now prepare a bibliography of ~~~ programmed learning research

which involved comparisons with computer aided instruction .

S: 

-

D:

10. Make up and carry out a detailed search plan to obtain a bibliography

of writings concerned with individualized training . Submit the

plan with your test and printout .

16

• - - • • -~~~~~~~~~ --•~~~~ ---- ~ •
• -,

~

‘.-

~

---

~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

-~

- - 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

4.> I S a o o -~~ ~~

o 

0 

~0 

8

.,-

~ 

0

S C’)

1..~ E o. a a S I-i 0 4.> ~ 0 C’) Cl) Cl) S 4.> ~ Cl) ~ 0 5 5 5 5 ‘0 5 .

~ 

—~~ 0 0 0 0

~) 

4— > Q) I-~ 0 I 

.

~~ ~~ .0 .0

.c a iv E-~ .0 C C’-> 4.1 0. 0 01 ~~

— C 

‘-

~ C C

8 I ‘—~ —1’ ~~ 4.> 0 bl) C’)

0 

~-i cn

iv 

.0 

5 o ~.> .,..4 .

~~ 

(~

0 4.>

~ C>, 4.~ 0. -~

I 0 C.-.

.5 ~~ iv C.) 8 a -u~ 8 ti-> ~~ 5 r 4

~ a o o ~

S S S 0 ~~ Cl)

a a

~

4 Q)

C’) >1) 8 

5

0. Q 

.~

4 S Cl)

E-’ 0 5 

~~

l

~~ S 

C.

)

~~ 4.1 ~~ 5 Ii) ~~ < a S .~

.4 ..4 ~~~ 

—~ C’> c”> —ri- lf’

-

i 

~

0 

C—

>,) 

.,.4 

~i. Q ~~ a ,

~~ ~~ ~~~ ~~~

>~ C 

C’ 4.> .0 ~~~ (ID

‘-4

C Z z C rP~.> F-i .‘ 

X

~~~ ~~~ 

F—> iv

~~ ‘-4 

-~

• -

~ C a.

~~~ 

-

~~ 

8 F-- 0C..) S C>) aS 5 

0 • I-> C’ Z r—

o I—I LP

>

F-> 

~c 

LID ~~ 

cn LID m m Lfl ~~

rj,

iv

‘.4a

-

~ ~~ (‘> I>< o

o C>)

‘-> 

a.

~8 C>) C>) • .

~~ 

.

0 4., 4.1 C>) C>) ) ‘—4 4., 0 0. S S 8 .D.~ ..4

(0

a

o F-

->

~—4 

F--> a)

S 

~

l) F-

- o 0 

F->

._, .,4 .. 0

4.> ~ C>) a S ~~~ 

‘-, ~~~ 

C’> ro 

-

~~ 

LID 

~

0 C—

.

C>) (1) C>, S 0) C) 0

~ 

CC> ((1 C/)

17
-— 

-:

I C>) a

I-I S0 -u o C>)

S S 0 

N-

r4 0 5 Z CC> --4 -H I-> -C> I ~~ C— If

~ I ,-4 LID LID C’> U Cl) S F-’ C-I .0 ~~ ~~ ~..4 -~ O C.) CC> S H a) 1.4 -u -iv U 0. I-> H C—) 0 o CC> C>) C>) C.) C) ~~~ C>) bI) -H 1-i S F- F’—. -H 1.4 1-’ >1) -

~ a) 

a)

.0 CC> C>) 4~1 8 CC> ‘4-> 5 o -~ -4 COS F--. C>) H

o Cl) S CC> S S S CC> a a) - P.

-iv 

S CC> 0 

5 a ~~~ a) C.> .0 iv o U P. -

~~P. C>) CC> 0 4.> U CC> 1.4

~~ 0 

~-> 

a

cC> 

a

.0 C>

)

4.1 4.> f-.>

._, a C>

) C>) CO 01 O U 5 F-> 0 

F-’ H -H C>) F- (J

C U 

.0 H 0) FS -.5 a U 0 -

~ ‘- .—~ c-> c-i 

-.zr Lfl 

‘

.0 N.

0) F- CO (0 F>.. 5 5 5 C) 

C ~~ Cr ~~ .,.4 (0 (0 zC

I-1

F’->

H

-~ CC>

-.5 -u 5

F-- 

.,_.

4 F>) 0 0 CO C) -H -.4 

0 C>) C.> Z c-i 

-

~~ I-> 0) 0 -4 a F-’ LID I 0~ L1) ‘C’ C--. -I C-I LID C-I iv a e -

~~

.0 CC> ~~ U Cl) .0

4.1

‘4-> 0 - 

-

•

o 0 u F> 

>~~ F’< o a -.-4 C>)

F--.. F> P. 

U C.) 0) 0 U CC> 0. 4-J C>)

5 .0 0 CC> U C>) CC> ~

u 1-> .0 CC> 0 4.1 U-.> C>) S .0 U 0 4.1 (I)

0) 

.

0 >2) U 0 4.1 I-i C>, C>) CC> o~ .0 >2) 0) U 0) Cl) ‘1) 0)

S F> H C’) -H 0)

CO a 5 ‘iv S ~~ 0 C>) -H F-> --I S -- 0 4.) -H C>) C>) F>) a CC> .,~

4 H ~ H 

C’> 

C’) ~ 

L’) 

‘

.0 N.

0) U F” cC> (0

5 

0) 0 ~~ C’ 0 F> C/) Cl)

18

uIII..L_ 

~~~~~~

•

.

~~~ 

- • 

—~~~~~ 

—__________
~~~~~~~~ _ --~~

. -— ----.- 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

- , 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EVALUATION OF ADIT

Question 5: Assuming access readily available , es timate the frequency

and total time you would use ADIT in one month.

SUBJECT FREQUENCY TIME

1 1 45 minutes

2 2—3 3 h ours

3 8 1 1/2 hours

4 2 l l/2 hours

5 2 4 hours

6 1 ihour

7 1 5 minutes

1 - - .
EVALUATION OF ADIT

Question 6: Think of a topic relating to the design of instruc tion with

which you have some familiarity. Now estimate how long it would take a

person unfamiliar with that topic to do a literature review at your

local libraries , with and without prior DDC search , and using ADIT.

Subj 1 — pie : Training Devices and Simulators

Library Search Time : 30 hours With DDC : 8 hours

ADIT Search Time : 2 hours

Subj 2 — Topic : Compressed Speech

Library Search Time: 40 hours With DDC : 30 hours

ADIT Search Time : 8 hours

Subj 3 — Topj~~: Long—Term Motor Learning

Library Search Time : 40 hours With DDC : _______

ADIT Search Time : 8 1/2 hours

Subj 4 — 

~~~ ic: Multi Media

Library Search Time : 40—60 hours With DDC: 8—10 hours

ADIT Search Time: 2—3 hours

Subj 5 — Didn ’t respond

Subj 6 — Top ic : Laboratory vs Lec ture Instruction

Library Search Time: 16 hours Wi th DDC: 8 hours

ADIT Search Time : 8 hours

Subj 7 — To~ 4~~: Job A ids

Library Search Time : 3 hours With DDC : 20 minutes

ADIT Search Time : 15 m inutes

20

• ~~- -

~--~-— - - - - - -

~~~~~~ - — - -~~~~~
_______ 

-

~ - ‘-

-

• --

-

-

- ---------

-—- 

-

~~~ — ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

C>) 6

S S Ci) H

-u Cl) 

CC> H 5 ~5 F- H C CC> 

0 - C U Z 

H

~ C CO C- (C> I-I

O Cl) a) H 

‘

-0 0’ (0 

—~~ >0 if) C’) .—4 

if) C-I H 0 --I C>) F> -.5 H U 5 C) CO C 5 ~~ -H -.5 - CC> F’- F-.. H H C>) 1.> c-.> IF-~ b ~~ >2) 0. 0 C>) S 4.> F-’- iv -iv .0 H CO S U 0. S CC> 8 -H

5 0 F> Cl) O C.) >2) 8 F--, 4.> >2) Cl) Cl) U 0 -H -H a

-iv s F-.. C>) -H a >2) 00 6 .

H CC> iv 

H

0 F> CC> CC>

CC> C>) 

S S F- S 0 —4 0 --4 -H CC> C) 4->

F’- - C) 

- U >2) 5 0) S F- 1.> a o 0) .-4 U C>) 0)

~ 6 0 a C.) 

Cl) S F- S C) C>) C) 5 -H CC> H -. 0 -H U 

H (0 CO H a 0 H S CC> ~~ F>) O 5 0) -H 5 ~-

> H C’> 

C’) -1 if) >0 N- H 0 >2) 5 0. 0 (0 i—I -H .0 S 0 ~~ .. C U ) 0 H F- >2) Cd) -.5 Cl) a 0) -H H C>) ‘ F> F’- -iv cC> F>-> S C>) C>) C>) 0 C) C CY .0 0. 0 -H C/) z0H

H H a

-.5 H H Cl) C>)

~~ ~

-4 C CC> C>) 

5

‘-1 ~ 0 5 0 

H -.5 C 0 C) CC> F-- H -H CO F0 F>) H 0 U Z C-I C U C) H U H

-.5 5 CC> CO H 

>0 

o-> 

a’, >0 (0 (0 C’) 0 N. 

C’) F> 5 C>) -.5

~~ >2) U iv F> ~~ 0 U Cl) -H CO

-H C>) 0 F- .0 H -H -H F-.. C-.> U F’S 0. ‘iv F> 6 5 5 iv 5 0 0 -.4 F-- 0 C-)

F’-> .0 

U a o 0 0 -H F> a) ~iv CC> -H

0) 41) 0 C>) 00 Cl) C>) H CC> C>) F’. .0 F> F> 5 CC> >2) 0 S F- 0 0 H 0 -H CC> C) C>)

F- 

-iv 

6 U 12) 5

~ 0 F- Ci)

O >2) H a Cl)

~ 6 0 -.5 S FU C) S H 0 H C-- C>) 

H

N. 5 F-.. a 

0 H Cl) ~~ Cx) O 0 0) 0 ‘~) H 

C’> 

C’) 

-

~~ L1) 

‘.0 N . o C>) 5 .-4 (0 -H .0 0 0 - - U ) 0 0 C>) Col Cl) Cl) .5 H C>) •- F> 0 CC> S C>) C>) >2) 0 Cr .0 0. U (/)

21

h1

-- 

-~~~~~
- - 

______ 

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

’

~

’~

~— 

-

—iv

S .

~ C>

) H -H 5 5 CO .)

~ 

•.-4 H

5 .0 CO 

m F-—. 0 U U iv F’- (0 C’) F> -H CC> 5 0 C>) U C) .0 5 CC> U Z H >- S C-) -H ~~ ~~~ ~~ 0 CO I—I

~ S 

‘~

-

~ F-.. a >2) H >0 0> 

O\ >0 (0 I c-i C.> •H ‘4-> C-> F> 0 U C) 0 0 41) CO U CO C>) ~ S 

~

— 0 

IF’S 

o 0. Cl) 0 F-.. C>) -H Cl) 8 0) CC> F> H C>) H H 4) .0 0 ‘—‘ H .0 0. F-- -H U .0 .0 CC> a ‘— 0 5 a 00 F> H a 0 0 0 0. C~

j C.> 0. -H 0 F’- 0 U CC> C.> U C>) CC> CC> F- CO F> H 5 —f 0 1.> C>) C>) CO 5 .0 .>-i

F- F> -H C.) 

a Cl) -H .‘

- U Cl) C>) U a 

S -H C>) 0 F> C>) -H H CC> -H 6 C>) 0. 4.> 0. 4-> ~

iv a -H 0 -H CC> 0 C) C>) S —4 P. 0 6 0 -H F> P. -H P. .0 0 S F> -H Cl) CC> ‘.1-> 

a Cl) 0. 5 5 0. a a~ 0 CC> >2) >2) -. ,

~~ C>) -H 

C.) 

.0 H .0 CO U C-. C>)

0 CO C>) iv a a 

F-i O 0 a H C.> ~~ 0

• S F> CO 5 II) S C>) F>) 0 0 C>) .5 0 P. ‘ ) i—I C-.> Ci 

-

.

~~ LID 

‘.0 N .

-.-4 ‘4-> 6 ~ U F- 0 

~

- (0 U C>) ~ —I C>) H ~~ a H U 0 .5 F-’ C>) H C/I H C>) H Cl) C.) 4.) H F- CC> C S C F’-.. C>) -H C C>) C)

-.5 0’ -.5 Cl) C-> 

~

5 -i~ 

~

iv (/1

F>. 0

Z F--. 0 F> I-I C>) 

H

F-’ S CC> -.5 ~~ S 0 >2) 0 4-) 0 S ~-1 0 -H C.) CC> H -.5 4.> 4.) -H .5 C>) CC> F-- C) U.> 4-4 H F- Cx) C>) 5 -H .5 

0 H 

.0 U 

C.> C>) C) ‘4-> 

0 CO 5 4-I CC> Z H m N. 

H

-H a 0. —4 12) F-> -.

~ N. N. (0 0> Cli 0 a (41 CC> F> -.5 Cl) -H 6 F’- CO ~~ 0 F-.> IF’S 

b 0. 0 .0 H F- C)) F-.. U ‘—‘ .0 0 F> C-.> 0 0 .5 >2) C>) a CO iv C.> .5 F-- H 0 5 0. • 0 CC> -H CC> CO C-.> I.> F> 12) cC>

C>) 

CC> .- CO -H C>) F> H S H U Cl) C>) C>) CO S -H C>)

F- C.> -H C) H F> 01 -H -H 4.> a C>) 4.1 .5 F> --- C>) 5 F> CC> 0 H CO P. U— , >2) 0. U 0. CC> a -H 5 C) 11) 0 C) iv 0 .0 0. 0 6 0 C>) 0. •H 0. a iv 5 1.> -H CC> 0 H 01 C/) 0. 5 S .0 5 a 0 0 U 0 12)

- - , >2) -H FH CC> CC> 4.1 .0 C>) a-. ..- 0 CO U H a F-

’ S iv -H H ~~ 0 O F> CO S s C F>) 0 0 C>) -.5 ~~~ H C-I 

C’) 

-

~~ if) ‘

.0 N- -.-‘ ‘.1.> 6 6 .- (0 U 41) 6 - .

~ iv

cn F—’ U 0 iv S H C/

) 12) H CC> 0 5 -H CC> S C F-.. 12) -H .5 C)

0’ -.5 U) F> .

)4 U (0

22
EVALUATION OF ADIT

Question 10: As a tax payer , indicate how you feel about ADIT.

Scale: Strongly object________________ ________S trongly favor

SUBJECT RATING

1 6

2 8

3 7

4 6

5 7

6 9

7 2

= 45

X= 6.4

s = 2.2

23

1 ‘-
I C)

8

C.> .0 0 0 U-I -. F>

4) C>) (0 P. ‘iv 0 -H F>) iv 5 Z it) 0 (0 LI) C-I 0 L/) L/) (0 0 S CO H LID ‘.0 (0 N. —1 H C-) Ui 0 LID C>) C- H .—4 H H ~

-4 N. H 0. 4-> ~~

.

a 0 ‘ >

~ C c-.> IF’< p

F--.. C>2 U -H CO

— ‘iv F> -H 5 C>)

‘iv C>) P. P. 0 4) 0. 6 -.5 C>) -H C) 4

4.> (1) -H U U

,0 C>) C) C) H CC> S P. F> 6 ~ F- C) H 0 ‘—‘ CO

-H

.0 U

-H ,0 .

)

~ 0 F>) H 01 H H C/I CC> 0

~) 5 4-i F> F>-) 0 .5 0 1i H C’> C’) -

~~ it) ‘.0 N. 0 -H 5 U-> (0 H U 01 C/) U C/I Cx) C>) oo a 0 C S S •H H 0’ -H H

F’S

H 0

~~~~~~F>-. F>) 0 I P-I

P4 Z -.5 0 0 H >4-4 0 H F> U -.5 C>)

~ 0. C>) -.5 ‘iv CO C’> F-- 0 ~ H Cx) C>)

0. 0 ~

x~) >0 Cl) U ~~ C C N. 0 C’> 0 0 C’> N. H H N. 0 ‘.0 0 N. ‘.0 N. LI)

S C>) H H 0 ‘iv F-.. -H 

~~~ 

01 

T :

-

~~~~~

- I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
S

I..>0

U..> C-. 

C

12) 4) 0. ‘iv N- 

(0 >0 -H F>~ N. N. C-) 0 ‘0 Ui C’ N. >0 H

S 0—. 

C’) (0 0 H (0 >0 (0 C-I 

H 5 00 H c-i C-) H -.

~~ H H C’) 

~

4 C>) H 0. II 44 a 0

~ 

IF’S 

p

0

F-.. CC> -u ‘iv -H S -iv 4)

0. C>) P. • 6 -.5

4.1 >2)

4.>

.0 iv C) H S P.. 8 80

• F- C) • 0 ‘—‘

‘iv

-iv

H Cl) 

H Ix) CC> 0 C/) S U Cx)

~ 0 .5 

‘-) H 

C’) C’) -

~~ Ui ‘.0 N. H S (0 C U a ~ F-> a

0) 00 Ix) S 5 • C 0’ -‘-4 H0

Ix..

0 I

0 0 H >4.>

F-. F> -‘.5 >2

)

~~ 0. C-. ,._:2

—.5 ‘iv C>) 

C’> F-- S -iv H Cx-) >2) -‘--4

0. 2 F>) —1 C 0-, C 

LI) Ui L/) (0 Ui (0 a CO Z -

~ H 0--’ 

LI) N. 0-’ C’) C H C-

) H H H H H aD —4 5 ‘4-.> H 0 0 II CI If F’.. CO -iv S C-I IF’S iv -H -,--4 -iv .uCC> 4)) >2) 6 1..> -H

4.> >2)U _5 4)

C) —4 5 0.

8 80

F- C) 0 •—

.0

C) 

~

C> H Cl) 

H CC> 0 5 4.> Cx)

0 .0 ‘) H C-I C’) 

—~~ Ui ‘.0 N. -H 5 (0 U Cl) ~~ C)) C/I

C>) 

CO S S

Cr -H

26

r

• 

-- - 

- - -- --_ -. —

‘- 

_s

_

_ __ _______ ____________
T

~

T

.

-

--

Ui C C Ui

.)

~ 

0’ C-) 

C’> C’) C-) C’) C’>

Cl) 

H

C-) IF’S 

b

S

Cl)

C>)

4.>

C>)

H - 0.

8 

U

0 C/)

C) a)

C.> 0 II) U US 4)-H

8 I -H U-.> H H

C>)

a H0 H 4-> Cx) Cx-) 0 I

~~ H C-) 

C’) 

-.) Ui 

‘-0 N. CI) 5 (0

~~ 0 

8 -H C>) C/) 0 U H H Cli .0 C>) 0 Cx) S F> C 0’ 0. 

-

H

‘

0

F>. I C 6

F> Z 0 0 U.>

H F> H C>)

‘.5 0.

H

F-- C>)

Cx) 0. >0 C-) 

H a Cx) C’) C (0 0 0 C LI) N. (0 (0 (0 C .-> a-. 0\ ~-4 >0 Ci H -1 C-) ~~~ -4 -

~~ 

C.’) C-’>

II

-

~~ 

-

~~~ C-)

IC< iv

-iv 

a

C>) C>) U 8

-H a 4.> 50 .0 -H C) U

S CC> 6 F>C>)

F- 0. 0 0 =

- - C’) C>)

1 .)

~ F-’ H Cl) 0 CO Ix)

~ U 

> ) ‘—I N c-i 

-

~ Ui 

‘0 N.

-H S :) 4-i a Cl) a

4)00

S S

0’ 

.H 

27

— 

-:;
-~~

0 H 

C’>

5 01) 

Z -H 5 H -1 

H

0 H LI) 

.-i

’) Ci -

~ it> 

C-’) Ui C-

)

‘1) 

—4 -.5 U)

5 00

U i—) 

IF’S iv

0

>1-> .0

C)

C>)

‘iv 2 -HS

00

>2) ,0

4-4

>4-4 0

.0

4-i

0)1 S

C>) H

4

~

l

CL) C-i

.0 0 U .0a 4)

U 0

CC> 

0U

Cx) -- .5 (/1 c-i C)

• S

O CO 2 F->

0 0 5 

0

F-> -H -H -.

4.> 5 >2) 

‘~

~

) H 

C’) C’) 

—

~

t Ui ‘.0 N.

F>) Cl) F> H (0

C C>) CC> CC> ~~ H S a) C) C/)

~ Q’ H U) 0C 0 Z 0 o -H F> 4.> CC> CC> o iv 0 

~~

.. C’)

-.5 

~ J S H 

Z

~~ 0 

U) C) H N. Ci 

H

C>) H LID >0 

-

~~ C’) Ci ~~ C’> C’>

-.5 a F> F-.. F-- C>) 0) F>

F>) F> .5 >2)

0. U F-- 0 C>) C—) IF’S iv ,0 0 4) U

4.> 

0 

—12)

C.>

F--. CO 4.1 CD. -H 6 F> 0 CO C) H

C) a CO C>) C>) S

.5 a -H ~~

) 0 11)

0. 5 C>) F> ‘4-4 U S 5 CC> 0. 0

C)

00 -- S F’-..

~~ I -H - F>

S a 41) F-

’ O F> H F-- 0 0 CC> CO Cx)

-H C>) -H - - ‘) H C-) Ci 

-

~~ LID ‘.0 N.

U H F> 12) (0 a C>) H ~~ C>) 4.> U CC> C/)

5 0 CC> C) 0’ ‘

-I-.> 6 C/I

28

- ~ ~~~

—

~~~~~

——-- -

~~~

-

~~~~ 

-

~~~~ 

-

~~ 

-
US

>2) 4)

H C>) H 12) 0. CO 8 .5 ~

iv 0 0 Ci 

H C>) 12) C) Z

C>) iv H H —1 ‘.0 —4

~ F- F-.. H LID N. ‘0 Ui ~~~ ‘.0 N. 

~~

-

CC> 5 0 F> -‘S C.> 01) 5 0) ~ C>) -

~ - F-- 0. 0) .-. C-) C-S iv 0 .0 >2) .0 4—’ 6 C)

0 0 F> 4-4 -iv a CC>

CL) C>

) 4.> F> a a S C>) CO 0) C>) U .0 F> U Cl)

C>) CO S S 0. 6 0 0 6 a -H

0 a F> 4.>

C) CO >2) C) 

U

.0 0. 5 0

F4

-> 

0) 0 0 ~~ 4) 4.1

.0 .0 CO a 

0) F- .0 S 0. C>) 4.1 H 5 U 5 0 CO 0 00 ‘iv C) C) U) 5 5 S -H F> •H CO -H

‘iv >2) 

6 S P. 5 5 Ix-.. a 0 H Cx) CO Cl) -H H Cl) -- CO U CC>

~ Ui U 

‘— C) 

U C) S 0 

H 0 5 C>) C>) F> H 0 H 0 0. .0 U F>) -H CC> U) -- ‘-~ 

~-4 C-) 

C.’) —1- LI) ‘.0 N. F>) 4) C>) ‘iv S >2) (0

C a H -H H H ~~ >2) 5 5 CO C!) C:) S 0 0 4-> C.’

O C’ F’-.. F- 0 C/I

HHC

-‘S 

I

F> Ix.. 0 .0 C U--i C)

O S Z -H S

H ‘.4-4 0 H 0 0 -‘S 1.>

C:’ 4-4 ,-) S F>

-‘S S CO F-- 0 Ix.> 0 ‘0 

H

Cx) S Z CC> H Ui C’) 

H

H C’~ C--I Ci 

-

~ Ui Ci LID C-) 0 -‘.5 U

(C> C—) 

IC-S iv

C>)

‘a - -H CO S S

CO -HS C>) F> C>) .0 CO ‘-4 4) C>) 4)

H U

41) -H U F> CO 0 0~ ‘4-. 00 O 4-1 C>) -.t F- F>

CO H S CO Cx. 0 0 Cx) -H S - - ‘~ ) H C-) Ci 

-

~ LID ‘.0 

N.

U 0 0) (0 Cl) H .—4 ~)

• C>) U CO Cl)

S CO C) 0’ 6 C/)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

2 

-

~~~
•

——----

---—-—-—---—- -—--

- —---—

• -—,--

-—.

-.

--

---- ----

- __ • 

— 

- • 

~~~~

i~~~~,x

~~~

:

-

iv

CO .0

S CO C>) -.4 5 .0 S H N. ‘0 >J F> CC> CC> C-~ ‘.0 Ci C’)

.0 CL) Z C’)

C) H F-, H C’) —4 

C’> 

-

~ 

-

~~ C— Ci

-H F> C-> .0 S C>)

F- -H F-

- C-) C-S iv 0 5 U 0

F--

. 4-)

0 ‘a C>) C>)

P. CC> H_0 C>)

.5 0

U CC> C>) -H

4-i 

~iv CC> S C) C>)

0. ‘a P. O -‘S 

~~ . 

a H C)) (I)

S H C>) -. -H CO .-4 N. -H 41) Cx) 0) F> C/I UI 0 0 C>) ~ ~ 0 0 4-) f-i

,-4 -H CO -. 

0 C 4-I U 6 0) Ix)

F-’ a CI) H 

‘~

~> H N C’) 

-

~~ Ui ‘.0 N.

0) C>) C>) 

CC> Cl)

Cx) 5 5 .0 C) ~~ C 0’ C- 4.1 U) Cl) H0

H S H 0 C a 4—>

-‘S F> 

0 C>) 

4

Cx.> 0. C>) 0 Ct.> CO ‘iv CI)

Z C>) F> 0 0) H S Cl)

H U F- 0 F> H CC> a a ~ S a a a Cl)

-‘S 6 5 Cx) F> 0 F> C-I C.> F> ~) -H C~ C>) ~ S C--> .0 5 5 5 5 

U

,-3 U ‘a H 0 ~~— 0 0 0 

0

-‘S a C>) H F-.> 

.

0 —4 C’) .5 .5 ~~ .0 F-- C>) 8 5

Cx) 0 01) 03 I/) C’) (0 

-

~Cl C’) ‘.0 

4 S U)

0 

0)

F-.. 4- .5 5 4~I

‘a 

.0 H CO S CL) S 0 C) -H

F- S F-.. C>) ‘a 4) -—-4 S S F> U -H C>) 0)

U 0.

C-C> ‘iv

,0 C>) 

S C) C>)

S F> P.

6 C>) 

U)

U

F- S 

‘iv 0 0. H S S 0 0 -- C) .0 >0 CC> 0 

H 0 5 00 0 0 5 F-x)

-‘-4 

01) -H 

~ ) H 

C’) Ci 

-

~~ tI) >0 N. 4..l 5 S (0 a -H -H 4) F- CO C/I

S ‘12 F> 0’ .0

30

—

- L i
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -

EVALUATION OF ADIT GUIDE TO USE

Question 8: Indicate the extent to which you feel the guide provides

the necessary information for using ADIT (at the terminal).

Scale : Much more required No more required

SUBJECT RATING

3 3

4 4

5 8

6 1

7 7

~~=32

X= 4 .6

o = 2 5

31

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

--

~~

—---

~~

—— - —‘
D ~

S1 RIB UT ION

AR) Distribution List

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

2 HODA (DAM I-CSZ) 1 HOUSACDEC , Ft Ord , ATTN: ATEC—EX—E—Hum Factors

1 HODA (DAPE-P8R 2 USAEEC , Ft Benjamin Harrison , ATTM : Library

1 HODA (DAMA -AR) 1 USAPACDC , Ft Benjamin Harr ison , ATTN: ATCP—HR

1 HODA (DAPE -HRE-PO) 1 USA Comm—Elect Sch , F t Monmouth , AIIM: ATSN—EA

1 HODA (SGRD-lD ) 1 USAEC , Ft Monmouth , ATTN: AMSEL—CT—HDP

I HODA (DAM I-DOT -C ) 1 USAEC , F t Monmouth , ATTN: AMSEL — PA—P

1 HODA (DA PC-PMZ-A) 1 USAEC , Ft Morsm outh , ATTN: AM SEL --SI—CU

1 HODA (DACH -PPZ-A ( I USAEC , Ft Monmou th, ATTN: C, Fad Dcv Bc

1 HQDA )DAPE -HRE) 1 USA Materials Sys Anal AgCV , Abe rdeen , ATTN: AMXSY—P

1 HODA (DAPE-MPO -C) I Edgewood A rsenal , A berdeen , ATTN: SAREA- BL—H

1 HODA )DAPE-DW ) 1 USA Ord Ctr & Sch , Abe rdee n , ATTN: ATSL --TEM—C

1 HODA (DAPE -HRL ) 2 USA Hum Eng r Lab , Aber deen , A IIM : Lb rary/Dir

1 HODA (DAPE -CPS ) 1 USA Comba t Arms T-.g Bd , Ft Bennin g , ATTN: Ad Su pervisor

1 HQDA )DAFD -MFA) 1 USA Infantry Hum Rsch Un it , Ft Bennin~, ATTN: Chief

1 HODA (DARD-ARS -P) 1 USA I nfantry Bd , Ft Benning, ATTN : STEBC—TE—T

1 HODA (DAPC -PAS -A) 1 USASMA , Ft Bliss , ATTN: ATSS—LRC

1 HODA (DUSA -OR ) 1 USA Air Def Sch, F t Bliss , ATTN: ATSA—CTD—ME

1 HODA (DAMO-ROR) 1 USA Ai r DeC Sch, Ft Bliss , ATTN: Tech Lib

1 HODA (DASG ) 1 USA A i r DeC Bd, Ft Bliss , AT’TN: FILES

1 HODA (DAb -Fl ) 1 USA Air DeC Bd , Ft Bliss , ATTN: STEBD—PO

1 Chief . Contu lt Div (DA-OTSG) , Ade l phi , MD 1 USA Cmd & General Stf College , F t Leavenworth , ATTN: Lib

1 M u Avst. Hum Res. ODDR&E , OAD (E&LS) 1 USA Cmd & Ge neral Stf College , Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: ATSW—SE—L

1 HO USARAL . APO Seattle , ATTN: ARAGP -R 1 USA Cmd & General Stf College , Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: Ed Advisor

1 HO First Army, AT IM: AFKA-OI -TI 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbt Dee Act . F t Leavenworth , ATTN: DepCd r

2 HO Fif th Army, Ft Sam Houston 1 USA Combined Arms CmbC 0ev Act . Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: CCS

1 Dir , Arm y Stf Studies Of c. AIIM: OAVCSA DSP I USA Combined Arms Cmbt Dee Act , Ft Leavenworth , A ITN : ATCASA

1 (If,- Ch ief of Sif , Studies 0Cc 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbt Dcv Act , F t Leavenwo rth , AIIM: ATCACO—E

1 DCSPEh ’. AIIM: CPS/OCP 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbt Des Act . Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: ATCACC—C I

1 The Arm y Lub , Pentagon , ATTN : RSB Chief 1 USAECOM . Nigh t Vision Lab . Ft Belvoir , ATIN: AM SEL—N V—SD

I The Arm y Lib , Pentagon . ATTN : ANRAL 3 USA Computer Sys Cmd , Ft Be lvoir , ATTN : Tech Librar y

1 0Cc , Asst Sect of the Army (R&D) 1 USAMERDC , Ft Belvo li , A IIM: STSFB—DO

1 Tech Support 0Cc , O)CS 1 USA Eng Sch, Ft Belvoir , AIIM: Lib rary

1 USASA , A nlun yton , A IIM: IARD-T I USA Topographic Lab , Ft Be lvoir . A IIM: ETL---TD—S

1 USA Rsch 0Cc , Durham . AIIM: Life Scie nces Dir I USA Topographic Lab . F t Belvoir , AIIM: STINFO Center

2 USARIEM . Natuck , AIIM: SGRD -UE -CA 1 USA Topogra phic Lab , Ft Be lvoir , AIIN: ETL—GSL

1 USATTC. Ft Clayton , AIIN: STETC-M0-A 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch, F t Huachuca , A IIM: CTD—MS

1 USAIMA . F t Bragg, AIIN: ATSU -CTD-OM I USA In telligence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , A IIM: AT$—CTD—MS

1 USAIMA . Ft Bragg, AIIM: Mar quat Lib 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch . Ft Huac huca , ATTN: ATS I—TE

I US WAC Ctr & Sch, Ft McClellan , AIIN: Lib I USA In telligence Ctr & Sch , F t Huachuca , AIIM: ATS I—TEX --GS

1 US WAC Ctr & Sch, F t McClellan , A IIM: Tng Dir 1 USA In telligence Ctr & Sch . F t Huachuca . AIIM: AT SI—C IS—OR

1 USA Quartermaster Seth, F t Lee , ATTN: ATSM-TE I USA In telligence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , AIIM: A TSI—CTD—DT

1 In tellig ence Material Des 0Cc , EWL . Ft Holab urd I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , AIIM: AT SI—CTD—CS

I USA SE Signa l Sch, F t Gordon , ATTM : ATSO-EA 1 USA Intellig ence Ctr & Sch , F t Huachuca , ATTN : DAS/SRD

I USA Chaplain Ctr & Sch , Ft Hamilton , AIIM : AT SC-TE-RD 1 USA In tellig ence Ctr & Sch , F t Huachu ca , AIIN: ATS I—TEM

1 ‘JSATSCH. F t Eustis , AIIM : Educ Ad visor 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch , F t Hiuachuca . AIIM: Library

1 USA War College , Car lisle Barracks . AIIM: Lib 1 CDR , HO Ft Huachuca , AIIM: Tech Ref Div

2 WRAIR , Meuropsychiatey Div 2 CDR , USA Electronic Prvg Grd ATTM : STEEP—MT—S

1 DLI , SDA . Mon terey 1 CDR , Project MASSTER , AIIM : Tech Info Center

1 USA Concept Anal Agcy, Bethesda , AIIM: MOCA-WGC 1 Hq MASSTER , USATRADOC , LN O

I USA Concept Anal Agcy , Be thesda , AIIN: M OCA -MR 1 Resea rch Institute . HO MASSTER , Ft Hood

1 USA Concept Anal Agcy . Be thesda , AIIM: MOCA-)F 1 USA Recrui ting Cmd , F t Sherr]i..n, ATTN: USARCPM—P

1 UrA At tic Test Ctr, APO Seattle , ATTM: STEAC-MO-AS L 1 Senior A rmy Adv ., USAFA000/TAC, El gin AF Aux F Id No. 9

I USA Artic Test Ctr , APO Seattle , AIIM: AMSTE-PL -TS 1 HO USARPAC , DCSPER , APO SF 96558, AIIM : GPPE—SE

1 USA Arma ment Cmd , Redstone Arsenal , ATTN: ATSK-TEM 1 Stimson Lib , Academ y of Health Sciences , Ci t Sam Houston

1 USA Arma ment Cmd , Rock Itland , AIIM: AMSAR-TDC I Marine Corps I nst. , AIIN: Dean—MCI

I FAA-NAFEC . Atlantic City , ATTN: Library 1 HOUSMC, Commandant . AIIM: Code MIMI 51

I FAA -NAF E C , Atlantic City, ATTN: Hum Engr Br 1 HOUSMC , Commandan t , ATTN: Code MP I -20

I FAA Aeronautical Ctr , Oklahoma Ci ty, A IIM: AAC -44D 2 USCG Academ y, Mew Lon don , ATTN: Admission

2 USA F ld Arty Sch , Ft Sill , ATTM : Library 2 USCG Academy, New London , AIIM: Library

1 USA Armor Sch, F t Knox , AIIN: Library 1 USCG Training Ctr , NY , AIIM: CO

1 USA Armor Sch , F t Knox , AIIM: ATSB -D I-E 1 USCG Traini ng Ctr , NY , AIIM: Educ Svc Ofc

1 USA A rmor Sch . Ft Knox , AIIM: ATSB-DT-TP I USCG , Psychol Res Br . DC, ATT N : GP 1/62

1 USA A rmor Sch, Ft Knox , AIIM: ATSB-CD-AD 1 HO Mid—Range Br , MC Det , Ouan tu co , ATTN: P&S Div

33

- - . • , --
US Marine Corps Liaision Ole, AMC, Alexandria, ATTN: AMCGS-F 

1 USATRAOOC, Ft Monroe. ATTN: ATRO-ED 

6 USATRAOOC, Ft Monr<> . ATTN: ATPR- AD 

1 USATRAOOC. Ft Monroe, ATTN: ATTS-EA 

1 USA Forces Cmd, Ft McPherson, ATTN : Library 

2 USA Aviation Test Bd, Ft Rucker. ATTN: STEBG-PO 

USA Agcy lor Aviation Safety, Ft Rucker, ATTN: Library 

USA Agcy lor Aviation Safety, Ft Rucker, ATTN: Educ Advisor 

USA Aviation Sch, Ft Rucker, ATTN: PO Drawer 0 

HOUSA Aviation Sys Cmd, Stlouis, ATTN: AMSAV-ZDR 

2 USA Aviation 9oft Tett Act .. Edwards AFB, ATTN: SAVTE-T 

1 USA Air Def Sch, Ft Bliss, ATTN : ATSA TEM 

USA Air Mobility Rsch & Dev lab, Moffen Fld, ATTN : SAVDl- AS 

USA Aviation Sch, Res Tng Mgt, Ft Rucker, ATTN: ATST-T-RTM 

USA Aviation Sch, CO, Ft Rucker, ATTN: A TST -0-A 

HO, DARCOM, Alexandria, ATTN : AMXCD-Tl 

HO. DARCOM, Alexandria. ATTN: CDR 

US Military Academy, West Point, ATTN: Serials Unit 

US Military Academy, West Point, ATTN: Ole of Milt ldrshp 

US Military Academy, West Point, ATTN: MAOR 

USA Standardrzation Gp, UK, FPO NY. ATTN: MASE - GC 

1 Ole of Naval Rsch, Arlington. ATTN : COO. 452 

3 Ole of Naval Rsch, Arlington, ATTN: COO. 458 

Ole of Naval Rsch. Arlington. ATTN: Code 450 

Ole of Naval Rsch. Arlington. ATTN : Code 441 

Naval Aerospc Med Res l ab, Pensacola, ATTN: Acous Sch Oiv 

Naval Aerospe Med Res lab. Pensacola, ATTN : Code l51 

Naval Aerospc Med Res lab. Pensacola, ATTN: Code l5 

Chref of NavPers, ATTN : Pers·OR 

NAVAIRSTA. Norlolk, ATTN: Safet~ Ctr 

Nav Ocoan<>graphic. DC. ATTN : Code 6251 , Charu & Tech 

Center of Naval Anal. ATTN : Doc Ctr 

NavAirSysCom, ATTN: AI R- 5313C 

Nav BuMed. ATTN: 713 

NavHalicapterSubSQua 2. FPO SF 96601 

AFHR l (FT) William AFB 

AFHRl (TTl lowry AFB 

1 AFHR l lAS) WPAFB, OH 

2 AFHRl IDOJZ) Brooks AFB 

I AFHRl IDOJN) l ackland AFB 

HOUSAF (INYSD) 

HOUSI\F IDPXXA) 

1 AFVTG IRDI Randolph AFB 

3 AMRl (HE) WPAFB, OH 

2 AF lnst of Tech. WPAFB. OH. ATTN: ENE/Sl 

ATC (XPTO) Rendo lph AFB 

USAF 1\oroMcd l ib, Brooks AFB ISUl - 4) !>.TTN: DOC SEC 

AFOSR (NL). Arlington 

AF Log Cmd. Mc<.:lellan AFB. ATTi~ : AlC/DPCRB 

1 Air Force Acauemy, CO. ATTN : Dept of Bel Sen 

5 NavPcrs & Dev Ctr, San Drego 

2 Navy Med Neuropsychiatric Rsch Unit. San Diego 

Nav Electronic Lab. San Diego, ATTN: fles Lab 

Nzv TrnaCen, San Diego, ATTN : Code 9()()()--Lib 

NavPostGraSch. nter o~. ATTN: Code 55Aa 

NavPos GraS . Mon:erey, ATTN: C<>de 2124 

NavTrngEq•JipCtr, Orlan,;o. ATTN: Tech l ib 

US Dept of Labor, DC. ATTN : Manpo>\er Admin 

US ep ~ Justice, DC. ATT:II: Drug Enforce Admin 

Nat Bur of Stanrlards. DC. ATTN : Computer Info Section 

1 Nat Clearing H ouse fo r MH - lnfo, Rockville 

I Denver Federal Ctr. Lakewood . ATTN: BlM 

12 Defense Documen tation Center 

4 Dir Psych. Army Hq, Russell Ofcs. Canberra 

1 Screntific Ad"'' · Mil Bd, Army Hq, Russell Ofcs. Canberra 

1 Mil and Air Attache. Austrian Embassy 

1 Cenrrc de Recherche Des f.actews. Humaine de Ia Defense 

Nationale, sS<~! s 

2 Canadian Jorn t Staff \Vashrogton 

I C/Au Staff, Ro yal Canadian 1\F,/\TTN: Pers Std Anal Br 

3 Chr ef. Canadian Del R.cn Staff. ATTN : C/CRDS(W) 

4 British Del Staff. Brrtish Embassy. Washington 

34 

O.f & Civil lnst of Enviro Medicine, Canada 

AIR CRESS, Kensington, ATTN : Info Sys Br 

MilitMrpSykologisk Tjeneste, Copehagen 

Military Anachl, French Embassy, ATTN: Doc Sec 

Medecin Chef, C.E.R.P.A.-Arsenal, Toulon/ Naval France 

Prin Scientific Off, Appl Hum Engr RICh Oiv, Ministry 

of Defense, New Delhi 

1 Pers Rtch Ofc Library, AKA, Israel Defense Forces 

1 Ministeris van Oefensie, DOOP/Kl Aid Sociaal 

Psycholc;itche Zaken, Tho Hague, Netherlands