A human factors assessment of the maneuver command and control (MC2) interface at company level and below / Bruce S. Sterling and Cheryl A. Burns.

Format:

Book

Government document

Author/Creator:

Sterling, Bruce S.

Contributor:

Burns, Cheryl A.

U.S. Army Research Laboratory

Series:

ARL-TR (Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md.) ; 3364.

ARL-TR ; 3364

Language:

English

Subjects (All):

Command and control systems.

Human-computer interaction.

Physical Description:

1 online resource (vi, 42 pages) : color charts.

Place of Publication:

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD : Army Research Laboratory, [2004]

Summary:

Research for the November 2003 Unit of Action Developmental Experiment 1, which was conducted by the Human Research and Engineering Directorate of the U.S. Army Research Laboratory, had three objectives. The first was to assess the level of functionality of the maneuver command and control (MC2) system as a C2 interface at company level and below. The second was to determine operator situational awareness (SA) and workload levels. The third objective was to examine aspects of the interface design, such as visual display, to determine if the Soldier-machine interface was satisfactory. The MC2 was subjectively rated by users at company level and below as performing poorly on many key functions necessary for C2 in an automated manner and in assisting users in performing these functions. These functions included maintain SA; access relevant information; collaboratively develop plans; develop operations orders (OPORDs) and create graphics; distribute OPORDs and graphics; rehearse the plan; maneuver forces; call for fires; control fires; notice changes in the situation in a timely manner; and respond to changes in a timely manner. This could be a result of the limited training (three days) that the personnel received but also reflects the need to improve interface design. Given the results noted here, it is no surprise that the SA of MC2 users was insufficient with a mean rating of 6 (insufficient; not aware of all the information required to perform the task) on a scale of 10 (higher numbers = higher SA) for all trials. However, even though the interface did not help users much on critical functions, workload was rated moderate with a mean of 5 (reduced spare capacity on a scale of 10 (higher numbers = higher workload) for all tasks.

Notes:

Title from PDF title screen (viewed on Aug. 11, 2010).

"November 2004."

The original document contains color images.

Includes bibliographical references (page 24).

OCLC:

74273669

Access Restriction:

Approved for public release, nit available in microfiche.