*esercbReport 1320

DESIGN GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA FOR

let USER/OPERATOR TRANSACTIONS WITH

C3 BATTLEFIELD AUTOMATED SYSTEMS

VOLUME 1:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Robert N. Parrish, Jesse L. Gates, and Sarah J. Munger

SYNECTICS CORPORATION

HUMAN FACTORS TECHNICAL AREA

L.. .iU. S. Army

Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

I' February 1981

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

50
U. S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

A Field Operating Agency under the Jurisdiction of the

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

L. NEALE COSBY

JOSEPH ZEIDNER Colonel, IN

Technical Director Commander

Research accomplished under contract

to the Department of the Army

Synectics Corporation

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-TST, 5001 Eisenhower 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 Institute for

the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

NOTE: The findings In this report are not to be construed as an official

Department of the Army position, unless so designated by ottler authorized

documents.
Unclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Dete En.tered)

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETING FORM A. REPORT NUMBER L2. GOVT ACCESSION No. 3. RECIPIENT'S CATALOG NUMBER

Research Report 1320 2 4 4. TITLE (and Subtitle) S TYPE OF REPORT & PERIOD COVERED

Design Guidelines and Criteria for User/ Interim: Oct 1979-Feb 1981

Operator Transactions with Battlefield Automated

Systems Volume I: Executive Summary 6. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

7. AUTHOR(e) 8. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(e)

Robert N. Parrish

Jesse L. Gates MDA903-80-C-0094

Sara J. Munger

9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT, TASK Synectics Corporation AREA & WORK UNIT NUMBERS

10400 Eaton Place 2Q263744A793

Fairfax, VA 22030

I1. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral February 1981

and Social Sciences i3. NUMBER OF PAGES

5001 Eisenhower Ave., Alexandria, VA 22333 14

14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS(If different from Controlling Office) 15. SECURITY CLASS. (of chis report)

Unclassified

15a. DECL ASSI FICATION/DOWN GRADING SCHEDULE

16. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of this Report)

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited

17. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of the ebetract entered in Block 20, It different from Report)

18. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Dr. Raymond C. Sidorsky, of the Human Factors Technical Area, ARI, is the

Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) for this project.

19. KEY WORDS (Continue on reverse aide It neceeary ad Identify by block number)

Battlefield automated systems Human-computer interaction

Design criteria System analysis

Design guidelines Transaction Feature Analysis

Functional Standardization User/operator transaction

2. ASTRACr(Con6e am revere. afd fnooeer ad Identify by block number)

-.This document is one of a series in the Final Report of Phase I in a project to develop design guidelines and criteria for user/operator transactions

with battlefield automated systems. The report is organized in five volumes

as follows:

DD o 1473 rorno* o,r s S ODSOLtTE Dt 4 "3 SUnclassified

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (When Dote Entered)

i
SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE(When Dae. Knfted)

Item 20 (Cont'd)

It';, Executive Summary,(this report)

I. Technical Report (TR 536)

III. In-Depth Analyses of Individual Systems!

_..A. Tactical Fire Direction -Systems (TACFIRE) (RP 81-26)

B. Tactical Computer Terminal, (TCT) (RP 81-27) - .Admin/Log Automated_§Systems (P8-28)

b-.' . Intelligence Information Subsystem (IISS) (RP 81-29)

IV.-Provisional Guidelines and Criteria)(TR 537)

~ 'Bacg'oundLiterature, (TR 538)

-,Volume I presents a succinct review of activities and products of the

project's first phase. Volume 11 contains a technical discussion of the

project's objectives, a hodologies, results, conclusions, amd implications

for the design of user/op ator transactions with battlefield automated

systems. Volume Ill documen~ts analyses of four unique battlefield automated

systems selected to represent different stages of system development and

different Army functional areas. Volume IV presents provisional guidelines

and criteria for the design of transactions. Volume V provides a brief

review of selected literature related to guidelines and criteria.

I,1 GRAHl

ITAB1 

OTC~ u-%nnouneed 0

copy I

,ftspEcTED

2

Distribution/

Av~ilabilitY Codem

Avail and/or

Dist special

Unclassified

SECURtITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAOEfAW Dola Enterod)
Researci Report 1320

DESIGN GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA FOR

USER/OPERATOR TRANSACTIONS WITH

BATTLEFIELD AUTOMATED SYSTEMS

VOLUME I:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Robert N. Parrish, Jesse L. Gates, and Sarah J. Munger

SYNECTICS CORPORATION

Submitted by:

Stanley M. Halpin, Chief

HUMAN FACTORS TECHNICAL AREA

Approved by:

Edgar M. Johnson, Director

SYSTEMS RESEARCH LABORATORY

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

5001 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia 22333

Office, Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

Department of the Army

February 1981

Army Project Number Human Performance Effectiveness

20263744A793 and Simulation

Approved for public releem.; distribution unlimited.

. lll . Il . II I I I I I i ll lll
ARI Research Reports and Technical Reports are intended for sponsors of

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

for implementation at the time of publication are presented in the last 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.

iv
FOREWORD

The Human Factors Technical Area of the Army Research Institute

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

increasing complexity of the battlefield automated systems by which they

acquire, transmit, process, disseminate, and utilize information. Increased system complexity increases demands imposed on the human interacting with the machine. ARI's efforts in this area focus on human performance problems related to interactions with command and control centers,

and on issues of system design and development. Research is addressed to

such areas as user-oriented systems, software development, information

management, staff operations and procedures, decision support, and systems

integration and utilization.

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

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

current practice results in a fragmented and unsystematic approach to

system design, especially where the user/operator-system interaction is

concerned. Despite numerous design efforts and the development of extensive system user information over several decades, this information remains

widely scattered and relatively undocumented except as it exists within and

reflects a particular system. The current effort is dedicated to the

development of a comprehensive set of Human Factors guidelines and evaluation criteria for the design of user/operator transactions with battlefield automated systems. These guidelines and criteria are intended to

assist proponents and managers of battlefield automated systems at each

phase of system development to select the design features and operating

procedures of the human-computer interface which best match the requirements and capabilities of anticipated users/operators.

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

in-house effort augmented through contracts with uniquely qualified

organizations. The present effort was conducted in collaboration with

personnel from Synectics Corporation under contract MDA903-80-C-0094.

The effort is responsive to requirements of Army Project 2Q263744A793,

Human Performance Effectiveness and Simulation, and to special requirements

of the U.S. Army Combined Arms Combat Developments Activity (CACDA), Fort

Leavenworth, Kansas.

JEPH Z ID R

Te hnical 4 rector

v
DESIGN GUIDELINES AND CRITERIA FOR USER/OPERATOR TRANSACTIONS WITH BATTLEFIELD AUTOMATED SYSTEMS VOLUME I: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Requirement:

To develop a comprehensive set of human factors guidelines and criteria

for the design of user/operator transactions in battlefield automated

systems for use by human factors specialists and system proponents,

managers, and developers.

Procedure:

To meet the requirement stated above, a three phase research program

was initiated. Phase I is devoted to defining human factors requirements

for battlefield automated systems and developing preliminary guidelines and

criteria. In Phase II, the technical data base will be developed further

and a prototype handbook of guidelines and criteria will be prepared.

phase III will test, evaluate, and refine the handbook, and complete any

remaining R&D items.

This document is one of a series reporting activities and products

of Phase I. A preliminary analysis was conducted of a broad range of

battlefield automated systems to provide an initial baseline of human

factors requirements. This baseline data base was then validated and

expanded through intensive analyses of four systems selected to represent

different Army functional areas and different stages of the system life

cycle. The resulting data base served as the foundation for the development of preliminary guidelines and criteria.

Findings:

Data obtained for the data base of human factors requirements amply

demonstrated the need for guidelines an criteria. Few design differences

appeared so serious individually as to threaten mission effectiveness.

Nonetheless, various combinations of such deficiencies could significantly

degrade system performance if the user/operator confronted them simultaneously or in rapid succession. Opinions offered by members of the development community who have reviewed the preliminary guidelines and criteria

suggest they will be useful in the design and evaluation of the humancomputer interface in battlefield automated systems.

vii

PAZC1NG PAIE DLAMK-NOT Fl
Utilization of Findings:

Findings from the analysis of individual systems may be useful to

proponents in specifying user/operator requirements for future system

evolution. In this project, the findings were incorporated in a data base

on human factors requirements which provided the "real world" foundation

for development of the provisional guidelines and criteria presented in

volume IV of this report. The provisional guidelines and criteria will be

utilized as the basis for development of the prototype handbook.

viii
TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION .................. ................................ 1

PROBLEM ................. .................................. 2

PURPOSE .................. .................................. 3

ACCOMPLISHMENTS ................. .............................. 3

RESULTS ................... .................................. 6

CONCLUSION ................ ................................. 12

ix
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

Figure 1 Army Battlefield Automated Systems, Categorized by Status

in the System Life Cycle and be Battlefield Functional

Area, as of 14 May 1980 ........ ...................... 1

Figure 2 Is There a Point Where We May Have More Systems in the

Acquisition Cycle Than we have People Available to Staff

and Maintain Them? ............ ....................... 2

Table 1 Overview of the Transaction Feature Analysis Technique .. ..... 4

Table 2 Overview of the Transaction Compatibility Analysis ... ....... 5

Table 3 Systems Surveyed with Transaction Feature Analysis

Technique ........... ............................. 6

Figure 3 Differences Among General Design Features of Selected

Battlefield Automated Systems ...... ................... 7

Figure 4 The Standard Office Keyboard Configuration and

Variations Found in Selected Battlefield Atuomated Systems . . 8

Figure 5 Two Keyboard Configurations Used in TACFIRE ..... ........... 8

Figure 6 Menu Display Configurations in Three Army Battlefield

Automated Systems ......... ......................... 9

Figure 7 TACFIRE SPA Message Format Selection Matrices for Division

and Battalion Computers .......... ..................... 10

Figure 8 Redesign of TACFIRE Division and Battalion Message Format

Matrix Structures ......... ........................ . 11

Table 4 Design Guideline Format ........ ..................... . 12

Table 5 Example of a Matrix Summarizing Guidelines for Use of

Highlighting According to the Highlighting Applciation ..... .. 13

x
[ XEC(IJT I V-E Hy

I TROP 'CT ION

~&IU;C(,nlUoi5dtv enI tho

.havL a1\wa':- .' -F*; !-,)I lttI. e '111d %at xI-; to (' Itl, -I

~~ tllii' 1n'1l "it!- a1 Wile u of a1-et

Met, 1~s 1rS !1 1 t2 1 1, l In ei t o Flyna Sa7t t h(' I- :It I

,I 1" to 1F r.'t t ;e( da t t o euialo inIformat i rian( iF !~o iI

0'r~ t1F011- S 0 T~t X Frn '~ 1 F~

t he Ar m, ia t t I,-- I ioua 1 I~OF

ARMY BATTLEFIELD AUTOMATED SYSTEM CATEGORIZATION

I~'ADMi LOGF TRIMt W FA ADA SAG COM MWR k

CATEGORY I I AWIS ASAS AASS ADMIW PALCT MIT CATLO 1 DISPS TEP ITS FOTS SHOSRAD C. RADIO1 ATSS

COCEPT AGTILIS

DEFINITIONI TASTES JIMIT

TSS CONTROL..

CS3 REPLACEMENT iTS IICATEORY If 111 SOTAS 050(10 FIX APYI TITTIS DARS IT I MS

SAAS I TACIES TACJAPA PATRIOT CSS TYC 39 PL IT

IATMOA, Splis CAS [CM s( [PC .39 OPT

TTVSTTTPMEPT TICA 1(5Ic

CATEGORY NI SIUS MAGIIC am5 ISO 73 (53 OAS 3 IAILOI TPlT 16 RX.PCP

APPROWOST TAM A&AZIRS STP 31 TT

P"DJCTIOAk SAILS GADRAI 1 PADS

IIIITAILATNM1 raGS SLAP TACIWS

0119115 OSIJUGSU MIS

IJSMC D.p

USAF eecp n 14o aip. LOA .,.m

Ilur . A rmy Battle fIild AL t ama t( e Syet ems , Catecjor i, ee " t atu.,; IF thct

S%,s tem I i Ye IeI and bv Ba t t I ( iI I i teneut ionlalI Area , as of 14 May 1980.
PROBLEM

ThQ proliferation of battlefield automated systems, however, carries wit)-

it : otential problems. As it turns out, battlefield automation, rather than

red'.icinq the human skills required for computer technology, as originally exT, cted, actually imposes demands for even greater skill levels. With the

A:r'ps pool of skilled manpower decreasing, we can anticipate a time when

":2;fficient lersonnel will be available to staff the increasing numbers of

-om lox battlefield automated systems being introduced (Figure 2). In additior.,

iI

0

LU

z -PEOPLE

-J

0

(n

0. .. -PEOPLE NEEDS AS

o L. 

A FUNCTION OF

o. 'SYSTEM NUMBER

u" 

AN CMPLEXITY

z

1979 19??

Fxau~e 2. Is There a Point Where we may have More Systems in the Acquisition

Cycle Than we have People Available to Staff and Maintain Them?

these systems are not designed with sufficient consideration for the user/

orerator. Therefore, while a system might be well desiane( technically, from

the user's/operator's perspective it may be less than optimal. Further, existing

and projected systems have been develoned without coordination among proponents

and developers. As a result, each battlefielC auto-ate. s',sten presents a new

learning experience for the user/operator, with little knowledge gained from

one system carried over to the next. This skill/demand mismatch imposes

unnecessary burdens on personnel and necessitates extra training that could be

2
avo-)ide.d by I'roper sys t em dus s q I I A s w t Ih it:', wt- I I Isos ii.t.:.I

Counterpar t in physical and electr ical compolluiht ai'eav 1I i I I :t a '2 I .

address- comp'atibil]ity issues. tIser1s/operator. i; fIrr;n '." .1 JT

dnO thetr during( their C,1aerS. More importantly, usraof ()- :. t' i ia.

Must interact with u.'ers of other s;ystems. Behaviorailiteo a i

cernied with dIesignls for sy.stekms; that Iwpemit usr/jrrr;Iatroia; 5:

f rom one, syst em t o anlothlerI, and tha t perm it usecr/ote rators i ti .

to interact convenientl..

That successftul ;vs;t em funct ion i nq der ends' Oil full anld f air : raI

of us;er/operator chiarLcter is ti Cs dulring~ dIeve lopm;M(I has; 1011(e; ; a

Neverthe less, virtually noti nq has b~een done to deve lo01 a !)uManl faCt ra c;

noloqy., to aid efforts to take those characteri-stics into accounit.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this project is to fill thle need for human factors technology by developing a comprehensive set of ituidelines and criteria for us-er'

operator transactions with battlefield automated systems. These efforts %-;1l

provide to the system design team the tools necessary to capitalize on humai;

capabilities and to compensate for human limitations, thereby einhancinue jiurl''

performance and facilitating coordination among proponents and developers.

The intent of this first phase in the three-p-hase project was to analyi-e

battlefield automated systems, qatherinq information to provide a bas--eline of

human factors requirements for user/operator transact ions. Another purj ose;,

equally important, was to develop a preliminary set of quidelines9 a;Id criteria

based upon the basel ine of information obtained from the analyses of systems.

ACCOMPL I SMfENTS

in order to fulfill these purposes, an initial survey of all b~attlefieldl

automated systems was undertaken. The survey beqan with a review oif the

13attlef ield Automated 'lanagement Plan (DAMP) and the Army Bat t leiel Inter

face Concept (ABId) Since neither program provided suitable data on)t human1/

computer interaction, it became necessary to devise special dat-i collectri

3
IIS t.1m1t1t S tr conduCt ill(; ..t -vtoy Lm ;

'Tho l'ransact iton lkectA ro Analysi -; ('lab I , 1) a nd t , ' 'iti ri;at t i), ov'i it Ibility Aria lyl is; (Table 2) tecli qut'; wOer dhvelc', to m.','t t,i s ; l ,'.d. T'II(

t o rill r t echtnique fac ii I t at es t i (p olls an1) d .'t (ma'lt I Cx tmat i"1 o)f iT!A vi .i I

dos i qnI feat ures wit hi i a system t hat affet (,('t s!;( '(; 'Iat o)I t rar oai t i .. '1

littt er 'rcodute h 0 1p to comp are dosi fi teat r ')I not W 'I'.'no , or at

componets such as workstaotions, withi it a ytm The t i 1.1tto

b)ecaie tht, first products of this pro ieCt , wet tl t., t to ,ximirune no 1,,,t , rV.o

sy t em; at1I relevaUlt Systems from other sotryij-o (al. .

Table I

Overviow of the Transact io Ft ature 'i AIi; 'll,]'',

TRANSACTION FEATURE TRANSACTIONAL IMPLICATIONS

IDENTIFICATION IMPACT ON SYSTEM

FUNCTIONS

DESCRIPTION Ouality of Function Performance

AMPLIF ICATION Timeline of Function Performance

Attribuo of Dedgn Feature

Type of Transecton Affected CONSEQUENCES

BEHAVIORAL IMPLICATIONS: IMPACT ON SYSTEM MISSION

IMPACT ON USER Quality of System Products

Efficiency of Production

Burdens

User Do's And Don'ts RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION

Error Probability IMPROVEMENTS IN DESIGN

Change Design Features

Eliminate Design Features

Add Design Features

4
Table 2.

Overview of the Transaction Compatibility Analysis

SPECIFY TRANSACTION TYPE: R ECTI FY DATA:

Interaction of Interest Facilitate Comparisons Between Items

wvInput U"Lsts

e Interface 'Matrices

ve Network

e Pr.ee

v, Derivitlve IDENTIFY DIFFERENCES

t- ~~ Prdut etween Features

SWi~in Fetures

IDENTIFY DESIGN FEATURES: Cmiain

Relevant Attributes of System Elements

e control Methods DEVELOP RECOMMENDATIONS .e Presentation Fortsf

v Data Entry and Handling Poceures v Commnon Design Features

we Messag Composition Methods re Standard Task Modules

,, Data Retrieval Procedures

ve GoaI -

aError Handling Techniques

Table 3.

Systems Surveyed with Transaction

Feature Analysis Technique

TACFIRE I 155

2

TOS BC S

TCT MAGIS (USMc)

DS4 AUTO RUN BOOK SDA (USMc)

DLDED ISIS (RAND)

PHOENIX AUTO RUN BOOK DAS3

BETA

5
In order to acquire creater detail in the human factors analysis of the.

user-computer interface, four specific battlefield automated systems were

selected for in-depth examination: TACFIR, TCS, IISS, and I)LDED. For oac,

of the systems investigated, a separate report has been prepared for readere

whose particular interest may focus on one system or another. Documentat i,,:.

has also been prepared on relevant ARI research literature dealing wit! r

factors guidelines and criteiia.

RESULTS

The results of both the survey and the detailed analyses clearly iindicated

that battlefield automated systems exhibit a wide range of differences relatud

to user/operator transactions. While these systems share many common design

features which perform the same functions, those features vary widely from on

system to the next. Figure 3 illustrates some of the inconsistencies in

general design features that were observed in various systems. As an example,

maay systems employ the same keyboard; however, as Figure 4 indicates, differeu:t

systems incorporate different keyboard configurations. Lack of uniformity shows

up even within a given system. Figure 5 illustrates different keyboard configurations used on two TACFIRE terminals. On one, the alphanumeric keys are

arranged in alphabetical order with non-alphabetic keys on the bottom row; and

the other terminal employs a modified office typewriter keyboard. In addition,

those terminals exhibit radical discrepancies in their numeric keypads, with one

keypad designed as a "desk top calculator" and the other arranged in the touch

telephone format.

System differences are by no means confined to hardware considerations.

Figure 6 shows that variations in menu display confiqurations are as qreat as

those in hardware configuration. In addition, menu selection methods differ

greatly among Army systems, as well as menu formats and the ways in which

menus are utilized.

Inconsistencies among systems became even more apparent when examininq

specific transaction features in greater detail. Different transaction methods

are used by different systems to accomplish the same function. For instance,

in using control methods to instruct the computer what functions to perform and

in what order, combinations of methods frequently are incorporated. The most

6
GENiERAL ESIGN SYSTEMS

FEATURES TuIN IE II Us Is

o aVnare 0o Mnus o Menus CeomeNO TYPE o Pref Pnefernuatted 0 ornd language a Co.nan0 language 0 Cowmnd language

Yes sege o mrtted o

" HOfl'eHrdwe a 0

C o Fn ctEon keyE o eytoard 0 Light Pon o Function kej

CoND ENTRY METHOD a Message entries c Function keys 0 Fution keys eodKeybord a Yessaqe *ntrfee a Ktybo d0 o

0 HEL.P f1W~ SIM AVAILABILITY OF HELPS/ N 2 leyels of support YMYo Tutorial amessges

USER AIDS a None O ol ' We halt O Ste'4 AlsDIeJs Nive

;ategrBl HELPS

SHOWBOX FILES o NO a Staff wrking file$ 0 ts0 Yes a Yes

TYPE OF SYSTEM ARY C' C, Intel Intel File Yanaling

APPLICATION Dlisian & below Case Theter 010sson ENVIRONMENT

nlgner-level C R; CCR. GA COR, G2.

INTENDED USERS artillery soeciellsts G2 t. G3 staff Intel lnalists Intel analystS

L o-er-leu ei 2 GO 5t ' +

INTENOED OYERA+CRS et~lley SYr e t~l~ ti E*1oted 2 en.o.nel Ittel anelysts ntel analyst% 0 Sone

o epot fo"rtI

USER-DEFINED COS4RANDS A one b SIt ue n Gla-1l o None 0 Soe 0 Macro language

o Report fon-ats

USER-OEFINED INPUT o one A 'one uilt " GIM1..

CODES 0 N.ro language 0 None

Figure 3. Differences Among General Design Features of Selected

Battlefield Automated Systems.

7
Figure 4. The Standard office Keyboard Configuration and variations Found in Selected Battlefield Automiated Systems.

AC Ke~boa~d

Figure 5.Two Keyboard Configurations U~sed irt) rL
TAtF IRE PRErORMAT[ED MESSAGE IN UIIIIN;, I IiT. i I PIN lll TI 11,1W

A l Al I11 II TIAINING; /OP UNI "

l~1 % I I ,1 • '1 II 'W i 7' 

1dM M1tNUl IIATA ENTRY FORMIAl Ml Nil S F LE lION

All IIAIA A,1 ANALYSIS: INPUTI

I IANI JA;F [lINT IS TONI T , 1111II 2 . I IANN [ IN IIIAL IiATr IO N

tII1I. W AUIT FAIir f l- 0-I1 3. II AL UikEN INITIAII1AIION

Il 110111W A11W Kr Vt A(Wl (If AC 11

fIt)T l'E INF PPTGT I'I SNF 5TGT 4. INY INITIAL IIA I1N

Ml 4 1 I I AN[0 ' . I if RWy I Ii W Y SIIII R II R IN ITIA .I A IION

NEXT A(TIVITY INSTF INSIF

El IACI PILOT VATA 6. (IIMIUNIEAIION ERROR THRESHOLDS

ANAlYSIS. INPII AND MISCEILANOUS COLUMNS FOR USE . AUTHORIZATION

WIIII ACO D)ATABASE ONLY! 8. ANTI-IAM MATRIX

S[E.ECT ()

I2S 2 GIM MENU TCS SYSTEM INITIALIZATION MENU

Figure 6. Meru Display Configurations in Three Army Battlefield Automated

Systems.

unique hybrid method observed was the format selection matrix on the TACFIRE

ACC SPA (Figure 7). The two matrices, as they stand alone are satisfactory;

they are organized by message type and logically constructed. However, of the

47 codes common to both, 28 are presented in different locations on the two

matrices. Any user who becomes familiar with one menu could easily become

confused when assigned. to use the other.

Errors in selectfng message formats could be significant, perhaps unacceptably high, particularly when the user/operator is under stress. Inherent

problems in the SPA message format matrices can be resolved, however, with

redesiln of the message format selection matrices by placing all codes common

to division and battalion in the same location (Figure 8).

9
DIVISION BATTALION

-- © - ©- - - -1- - 515 SAFS AAllSF 1 SYS AFN" AFt MP All FM

FCM [T P A C TRY AITlP CD INT1

AT) AT SYA T

jPDJ 1 IS] AM FI APll W ~ D) LDJ MS MD P AT AZA T U AA

SPRY AF ( MIFF ATlJ AllT]1 SS AS SPAT 1F All FN F"

PGEION 3 ASFU SPLl TR M R S S FUSEL Of

___ \A ' FTJ SIA S4, SAT AD 'NS AWS FF 145 WA CLUIM! SAID f515IM [AT] (~ {~7> M AF AllPA ST AA S SYS SYS MET SPAT AFU MSIS Sys AFIpU SPAT lP Al MFT 

~SS UA NET 11F M E l S1 J155 ANl *F FPT P4T 

LASI DIA CFL CO . I9 cAl A AITTACK

SY F IIE SPAT AF U MiFF AllF FMN1 S A FT)I SPRY1 MiFF All SET PNA

UDUA DIA RDIA DIN ALD~ADM DIA AL I L i Di ALA AI

Figure 7. TACFIRE SPA Message Format Selection P:atrices for Division and

Battalion Computers.

10
FMC sm, V& ,f rA

topal

IV -r IN w silly

r if

- -FM - -

SYS FMt~

Pigure Reclesicnn of TACPIRE Division and Battalion M-.s.ioe Format -latrix

Structures.
p .- . . . . . . . . I, _ _

CONCLUSION

Differences such as those described above are pervasive in Arm: .':"t ;

in general, battlefield automated systems are characterized by tranva-tion

design features that are incompatible with human capabilities and limit it i(,.

While individual design deficiencies, considered individually, may not i*t.

paralyzing to the user/operator, the effects of such inconsistencies ar

cumulative. When the user is faced with multiple design deficiencies, oftcr.

occurring simultaneously, human performance is impaired. When users/op!i-atrc ;

cannot function optimally, neither can the system.

Results from the analyses of battlefield automated systems provided the

foundation for the development of guidelines and criteria. The format for

these detailed guidelines is shown in Table 4. Recommendations for implementation of desirable design features are presented in summary matrices such

as that illustrated in Table 5.

Table 4.

Design Guideline Format

G. CROSS INDEXING

2.1 FIXED ALPHANUMERIC DISPLAYS

2.2 VARIABLE-LENGTH ALPHANUMERIC DISPLAYS

2.3 GRAPHIC DISPLAYS

3.0 DATA ENTRY ASSISTANCE

3.4 EDITORS

7.4 ERROR CORRECTION TECHNIQUES

7.7 ERROR DETECTION TECHNIQUES

12
Table 5.

Example of a Matrix Summarizinq Guidelines for Use

of Highlighting According to the Highli-htinu, Application '

HIGHLIGHTING APPLICATION

KEY:

I = Best

2 n Second Choice

3 = Not Recommended

HIGHLIGHTING METHOD

BRIGHTNESS CONTROL 1* 1* 1 1* 2 1* 1* 1* 1.

CHARACTER SIZE CONTROL I 1 1 1 3 3 1 1 2

ALL UPPER CASE 2 2 3 2 3 2 2 3 REVERSE DISPLAY 2 2 2 2 2 3 2 3 1

UND RLIN G 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 2 3

DIFFERENT FONT 2 2 2 2 3 3 2 3 3

COLOR CONTROL 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1

BLINKING, PULSATING 3 3 3 2 1 3 3 3 2

,BOXING 3 3 3 1 3 1 2 1 2

ARROW ING 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 3 2

SYMBOLIC TAGGING 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 2

ALPHANUMERIC TAGGING 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3

POSITION DISPLACEMENT 2 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 2

• Recomended as Ist choice for standardization purposes

The design guidelines will support system proponents and developers in

selecting design features which best match the recuire!.ents and capabilities

of anticipated users/operators. Thus, the skill-6c/ao(l mismatch that currently

imposes excessive performance requirements on users/operators will be reduced,

thereby reducing the training burden that accompanies so many contemporary

systems. An additional benefit of this user-oriented design will be an increase in behavioral interoperability, as that concenit was described earlier.

It is not the purpose of this project to triviali.e user-system interaction in battlefield automated systems, but one fact nust be recognized. The

users of these systems are supposed to work in a functional area; they are not

supposed to be computer operators. The design of the system should allow the

user to focus on developing greater skills in their c"7eer fields, rather than

13
peripheral system operation skills. Furthermore, that design should allow the

user to concentrate on the generation of system products, not on how to make

the system work.

We need to stop talking about user requirements, as though they were somehow different from system requirements. Users are components of systems. A

tank doesn't fight without a crew; neither does a Cobra. And battlefield automated systems don't function without users and operators. User requirements

are system requirements. If we don't build systems to feet all their requirements--human as well as hardware, software and product-- then those systems

will fail. And if they do fail, then we will have naid the greatest of all

system life cycle costs: the cost of building battlefield automated system

that cannot do the job.

14
DISTRIBUTION

I US AmMY WESTERN CDMMANU ATTNI AP

I DEPANTMENT OF THE NAVY THAININb ANALYIS AND EVALUATION GROUP

I HUiJA ATTN: DAA,-ED

I HU. iCATA ATIN: AICAT-UP-W

I US AHMY MATEWHILL SYSTEMS ANALYSIS ACTIVITY ARMY PROCUREMENT RESEANCH OFFICE

? HUuA RESEARCH AND STUUItS OFC

I MILIiARY OCCUPATIDNAL DEVELOPMENT DIV OAPC-MSP-O, RM 852C HOFFMAN BLDG I

4 OASO (MRA AND L)

I MARIpiE CORPS DLVELUPMENT ANU EuUCATIU4 COMMAND ATTN: CODE E041

I HUIA ATTN: UAMO-4UR

I HU TLATA TECHNICAL LIbRANY

I HUOA ODCSPEH

I USRAuCOt STC

I HQOA ATTN: DAMI-ISI

I USA t.ORADCOM ATTN: AMSEL-PA-RH

I USA .WRADCOM ATIN: ATFE-LU-AC

I HEAOuUARTLRS, US MARINE CUHPS ATTN: CUOE MPI-aO

2 US ANMY EUROPE AN) SLVENTH ARMY

I IST INFANTRY OiVISION ANO FT. PLEY ATTNt AFZN-DPT-T

I USA INTELLIGENCE AND SECURITY COMMAND ATTNt IAOPSATNG-T

? HQ TMADOC TECHNICAL LlHRARY

I NAVAL TRAINING EUJIPMENT LEN ATTN: TECHNICAL LIBRARY

I MILIIARY UCCUPATINAL DLVELOPMENI DIRECTORATL ATTN: ATZI-NCR-MS-Mo RM 3N33 HOFFMAN BLDG II

I DATA ANALYSIS DIVISION ATTN: ATLI-NC4-Mo. HOFFMAN BLOG IT

I USA MILPLHCEN ATTN: DAPC-POO-T

I USAFACFA CHIEF. )RGANIZATIONAL kFFECTIVENESS MRANCH

I RTH INFANTRY DIVISION

I HU0OA ARMY FORCE 4ODERNIZATION CUORDIATION OFFICE

I NAVAl AIR SYSTEM COMMAND /

I DCSOwS (DIST 4) ATTN: UAMU-RUI

I 123D USARCOM RESERVE CENrtR

I US ANMY SOLDIER SJPPORT CENTER /

I DIRELTORATE OF ARMOR AVIATION AITN: AIZK-AAD

) USAAHMC * FT. KNOX AVIATION ulVISION

I USA fORCES COMMAND AFIN - DEPUTY C OF S FOR INTELLIGFNCE

I USA PORCES COMMANJ AFUP - DEPuTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR OPERATIONS

I US AMMY AIR DEFENSE SCHOOL ATTN; ATSA-OTO

I OIRELTORATE OF TRAININb ATTNI ATZQ-T

I DIRELTORATE OF CUBAT DEVELOPMENTS ATTN: ATZOOD

I HUDAHCOM MARINE CORPS LIAISON UFC

I OEPAkTMENI OF THE ARMY US ARMY INTELLIGENCE * SECURITY COMMAND

I ARMY TRAINING SUPPORT CENTLR /

I US AkMY SAFETY CENTER ATTN: LIbRARIA4# BLDG 4905

I USA MISSILE COMMA4D ATTN; DRSMI-NTN

I CECOPI ATTN: DHSEL-ILS)

I USA iORCES COMMAND

I PM TKAUE /

I US MILITARY DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON UFC OF EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

I ARMY TRAINING SUiPPORT CENTER ATTN: ATIC-SMO

22 ART LIAISON OFFICE

1 7TH ARMY TRAININL COMMAND

1 HU UaAREUR ATITj: DCSOPS

I HQOA. OCS STUDY 3FFICE

I U.S. NAVY TRAINING ANALYSIS LVALUATION GROUP

I uSACuEC ATTN: ArEC-EX-E HUMAN FACTORS

I USAFaGOS/TAC SENIOR ARMY ADVISOR

I USA tLECTRONIC PRDVING GRUuNU ATTN: STEEP-MT-ES

I OASA (RUA) DEPUTY FUR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

I OFC uF NAVAL RESEARCH /

I AFHRL/LRT

I AFHRL/LRLb 15
AIR rOkCE HUMAN HESOURCtS LAB AITN: AHRL/TSk

I AFAMNL/HB

I AFAMNL/HE

I NAVAL PERSONNEL H AND U CLNTLR LOMMANU AND SUPPORT SYSTEMS

I NAVY PERSONNEL W AND u CENTER /

I NAVY PERSUNNEL R ANU U CENIER UIRECTIH OF PROORAMS

I NAVY PERSONNEL k AND U CLNTER /

I US AHMY AVN ENUINEERINb FLIGHT ACTIVITY ATTNI DAVTE-TD

e OFC uF NAVAL RESEARCH PEHSONNEL AND TRAINING RESEARCH PROGRAMS

I NAVAt PERSONNEL R * U CENTER /

I OFC uF NAVAL RLSLARCH PRUJECT OFFICER, ENVIRONMENIAL PHYSIOLOGY

I NAVAI AEROSPACE MEDICAL RSCH LAM AERJSPACE PSYCHOLOGY DEPARTMENT

I USA iRAUOC SYSILMS ANALYSIS ACTIVITY ATlt4: ATAA-TCA

I HEADwUARTERS, COAST GUARD CHItF# PSYCHOLOGICAL RSCH 8p

I ISA ,ESEARCH ANt) TECHNULOGY LAM /

I USA eNGINEER TUPU3RAPHIC LABS ATTN: ETL-GSL

I USA tNGINEER TUPO3RAPHIC LABS AITN: STINFO CENTER

I ijSA -NGINEFR TUPUSRAPHIC LABS AITN: ETL-TD-S

I 11SA mOBILITY EUUIPMENT R AND U LUMU ATTN: DRDME-TO (SCHOOL)

I NIjHI VISION LAR ATTN: DRSEL-NV-SUD

) ATrN: ATTG-ATB-TA

I USA HUMAN ENGINEERING LAB

I USAIS4tL LIAISON RED, USAAVNL /

I USA m.ATERIEL SYSIEMS ANALYSIS ACTIVITY ATTN: URXSY-C

1 USa mESEARCH OFC /

I NAFEL HUMAN EN61NEEHINU bRANCH

I USA mHCTIC TEST CEN ATTN: AMSTL-PL-TS

I UjSA tOLD REGIONS TEST CEN ATTN: STECR-OP

I U)SA k.ONCEPTS ANALYSIS AGCY ATTN: CSCA-Rup

I USA .ONCEPTS ANALYSIS AGCY ATTN; CSCA-JF

I UStC.CDA ATTN: ATLL-CAC-IC

I IISACmCDA ATTN: ATZL-CAC-IM

I USACAC ATTN: ATZL-CAC-IA

I USAC"CDA ATTN: ATZL-CAC-A

I l(iA iLECTRONIC wARFARE LAB CHILF, INTLLLIGENCE MATER DEVEL * SUPP OFF

I 1S1 vSCH UEVEL + STANUARUIZA GP, U.K.

I USA mESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT LAbS CHIEF, BEHAV SCIENCES DIV 9 FOOD SCI LAB

1 TRAJmNA ATTN: SAJS-OR

I NAVAL AIR SYSTEMS COMMAND ATTN: AIR-5313

1 ECUM ATIN: AMSEL-CT-O

I USACwEC TECHNICAL INFORMATION CLNTER

I USAAHL LIBRARY

I lJSA IRADOC SYSILMS ANALYSIS ACTIVITY ATTN: ATAA-SL (TECH LIBRARY)

I UNIFuHMEU SERVICES UNIT OF THE HEALTH SCI DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHIATRY

I USA LOMPUTER SYSTEMS COMMAND AITN: CDMMAND TECHNICAL LIBRARY H-9

I EUSTiS UIRECTORATE, USAAMHUL TLCHNICAL LIBRARY

I CENTtR FOR NAVAL ANALYSIS

I NAVAL HEALTH RSCH CEN LIdkAkY

I NAVAL ELECTRONICS LAB ATIN: RESLARCH LIBRARY

I NAVAL PERSONNEL H AND U CEN LIBRARY ATTN: CODE P106

I HONEywELL INC. SYSTEMS ANU RESEARCH CENTER

I AIR tORCE HUMAN RESOURCES LAB ATTN: AFHkL/OTS

I HQ. IT. HUACHULA ATTN: TECH REF OIV

I USA MCAL)EMY OF HEALTH 5CILNCES STIMSON LIBRARY (DOCUMENTS)

I SCHOuL OF SYSTLMS AND LOISTICS /

I USAMtHDC TECHNICAL LIbRARY

I DEPA.TMENT OF THE NAVY TRAINING ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION GP

I 0ISMA DEPT OF dEHAVIORAL SCI AND LEADERSHIP

I USA LOMMAND ANU GENLRAL STAFF COLLEGE ATTN: LfBRARY

I USA IHANSPORTATION SCHOOL USA TRANSP TECH INFO ANO RSCH CEN

I 1lS 4UMINCEN TFC-NICAL RESEARCH BRANCH LIBRARY

? HQ,)A USA MEu HSC.. AND DEVEL COMMAND

16
1 USA r1ELU ARTY HU

I INSTITUTE FOR ULFENSE ANALYSES

I USA IRAININ6 SUPP3RT CLNJEN ATIN: ATIC-LiST-PA

I AFriRi TECHNOLOUy DFC (Hi)

I USA rnOtsILiTY EU0UIMENT R AND 0 LUMMAN) ATTN: 1RUmE-ZG

I Hw, uSA ML~w AIIN: ANPE-OL

I 0IA U-- ARMY RETHA1\d1NO tL)L kSEACM * EVALUATION DIVISION

I USAF SCHOOL OF ALRUSPALE t4LVICINt AEROMEDICAL LIBRARY ITSK-4)

I US MILITARY ACAI)E4Y DEPT. OF IHiSTURYv BLDG 601

I USA iNTELLIGENCE- CEN AND SLH ATIN: SCHOOL LIbRARY

IUSA ANTELLi1GEL CEN AND SLH ATTN: ATSI-uP

I MA!41,,L CORPS INSTITUTE

I NAVAt SAFETY CENqTwR /

I USAAvNC ANDl FT. HJCKLR ATTN: A1ZU-ES

I US AKMY AVN TNGo LIBRARY ATTN; CHIEF LIBRARIAN

I USAAvNC ATTN: ATZU-D

I lIS MILITARY ACADL'4Y DIRECTOR OF INSTITUTIONAL RhCH

I USA AIR DEFENSE SCHOOL AIIN: AI$A-CD-MS

1 USAAuS-LIbRAkYUjUCUMENTS

I USA 4114 DLFENSL 82JARU ATrN: FILLS REPOSITORY

I USA INFANTRY BOAR) ATTN: ATL8-IB-AE

I USA iNTELLIGELF CLtN AND SCH ATTN: ATSl-DT-SFL

I USA tuRONANCE CLN AND SCm ATTN: ATbL-TU-TAC

I USA ARMOR SCHOOL ATTN: AILK-TII

I LISA ARMOR CENTLW DIRECTORATE O COMBAT DEVELOPMENTS

1NAVAi POSTGRADUATE SCH AITN: u)UULEY 0N% LBAR CD 1424)

1 USA IRANSPORTATIuN SCHOOL ULPOsTY ASSI. COMMANIDANT EDUCA. TECHNOLOGY

I USL% zIGNAL SCHOOL AND FT. t3ORuDON ATTNd: ATZH-ET

1 USA ARMOR CENTLw + FT. KNUX UFFiCL OF ARMOR FORCE MGT + STANDARDIZATION

I CH-IEP OF NAVAL tUJCATIUN AND TNt., /

1 USA SIGNAL SCHOOL * FT. GORDON LUUCATIUNAL TECHNOLOGY DIVISION

H U AlC/XPTI) TRAINI1NG SYSTEMS LLVELOP4ILNT

SUSA iNTELLIGENCE CLN AND SCH ATTN! ATSI-ERM

1 iJS AHMY ARMOR CENTER ATTN: A17K-TU-P~iU

I USA wOARTLRMASTER SCHOOL DIHLClORATE OF TRAINING DEVELOPMENTS

1 US CuAST GUARD ACADEMY /

I USA IHANSPOR1ATiOJ SCHOOL DiHFCTOHATE OF TRAINING + DOCTRINE

IJUSA INFANTRY SCHOOL LIBRARY /

1 USA INFANTRY SCHOOL ATTN: ATSH-i-V

I US Am~MY INFANTRY SCHOOL ATTN: ATStt-C)

1 USA INFANTRY SCstiUOL ATTN. ATSH-UOT-LRL)

I USA INFANTRY SCHOOL ATTN: AISH-LV

I USA mP + LHEM SCH/INu CLEN + FT. MCCLELLAN ATTN: ATLN-PTS

1 US.A iP * CHEM SCH/ING CEN * FT. MCLLE6.LAN UIR. COM8AT DEVELOPMENT

1 USA AP + CHEM SCHIING LEN + FT. MCCLELLAN UIRi TRAINING DEVELOPMENT

1 USA mP + CHEM SCH/TNG CEN + FT. MCCLELLAN ATTN: ATZN-mP-ACE

I LiSA INSTITUTE OF ADMINISTHATION AT'TN: HESIUENT TRAINING MANAGEMENT

1 USA g'IELD AWTILLLRY SCHOOL MORRIS SwETr LI8RARY

1 USA iNSTITL'1E OF ADMINISTRATION ACADEMIC LIBRARY

I USA *AR COLLEGL ATTN: LIbRARY

1 USA eNGINt.FR SCHOOL LIt4RARY AND LLAR41NG RESOURCES CENTER

1 USA4 ARMOR SCHOOL (OSARMS) ATTN: LIBRARY

I ORGA,YIZATIONAL EFPECTIVENESS CEN * SCH ATTN: LI8RARIAN

1 US A,.MY INTELLILNCE CENTER + SLHOOL ATTN: ATSI-TP

I US A..(MY INTELLIGE'ICE CLNTLR + SCHOOL ATTN: ATSI-RM-M

I US A,.iMY INTELL16LNCE CENTER # SCHOOL ATTN: ATSI-TO-Pm

1 UIS AoqMY INTELL1GL'YCE CENTER # sLHOOL ATTN: ATSI-CU-Cs

I US AHMY INTELLIGE'4CE CENTER * SCHOOL ATTN: ATSI-ES

I UEPAKIMENT OF THlE AIR Ot. AIR UNIVERSITY LIORARy (ATC)

I HU TmADOC TWAI'JbJG DEVELUPMLNT INSTITUTE

? HRITISH EMHASSY 4AITISti ULFENCE STAFF

?CAiNAuIAN JOINT STAFF 1
I CL)LS (w) LIB5NAky

I FREN..H ARM4Y AITACiL

1 AUSTmIAN EMHASSY 0E.FENSto MILITARY ANUd~ AIR ATTACHE

I CANALDIAN L)EFENC. JAISUN t)1AH ATTN: LOUuSELLORs UEFENCL P ANt) U

1 ROYAL NETIHFkLANi'S LMdASSY MiLlIlUY ATIACHE

1 CA4AI[AN FORCEb tI4St CUN~WiLLIS ATTN: PFPSUNNEL SELECTION

el CANAuLAN FORCES P--RSUNNLL APPL ISCH UNIT

1 ARAY PEHSUNNEL tStAHCH LSTAbLil)HMLN4T

1 NEII-$RLANUS EMt3AS5Y OFI-1tL OF 1HE A14 ATTACHE

I I PSiCHOLOGICAL H7ESEARCHj UNIT ATTN: CP4-6-13 (LTC M. J. ELLY)

e6 LIriRAWY OF CON'Jf4LSS LAC11ANGL~ ANL) (1FT 0TV

I I)EFEoASE TLCHNILAiL INFUHMAlIUN t.LN ATTN: 0TlC-00A-2

141) LP(NRY OF CON(,NLSS UNI4T UOCUMLNTS EXPEOITIN6i PROJECT

I oS buIVERNMEN7 PRIN11N4b OH.. LhitiARY, PUt3LIC UOCUMENrS DEPARTMENT

I US GuJVERNMENT PRINT~ING OH.. LPHHRY Alt) STATUTO)RY, LIR DIV (SLL)

I TH m&NMY LIBRAKY AT1N: AHMY STULJILS SL.C

3 / /

NUMHEN uF ADDRESSLES 202

TOTAL NijMHEH OF CUPIES 386

18