Comparing Oculometer and Head-Fixed Reticle with Voice or Switch for Tactical Display Interaction

Abstract

An experiment with 15 U.S. Army enlisted military subjects was conducted to compare the performance of an oculometer, head-fixed reticle, and touch panel for data entry on a generic tactical air combat display. The subjects used voice or switch to designate data items on the display that were selected with the oculometer or fixed reticle. The touch panel was included as a standard data entry device. Statistical analysis showed a significant difference in performance for the five configurations at the .0001 level. The reticle/switch, oculometer/switch, and touch panel are significantly faster than the reticle/voice, which in turn is significantly faster than the oculometer/voice. The reticle methods are faster than the oculometer methods. The switch action is faster than voice entry. The touch panel is twice as accurate as the other methods, all of which have about the same spatial accuracy whether oculometer or reticle, voice or switch. However, the oculometer/voice has nearly twice as many selection errors as the other methods.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Breglia

D. R.

(1981). Helmet-mounted eye tracker using a position sensing detector (PAT-APPL-6-262-153). Washington, DC: Department of the Navy.

Meyer

A. U.

(1981). Dynamics of two-dimensional eye-head tracking (AFOSR-TR-81–0610). Newark: New Jersey Institute of Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering.

Setterholm

J. M.

(1982). Assessment of stereo-graphics for fire control and navigation in fighter aircraft (AFWAL-TR-82–3008). Minneapolis, MN: Honeywell, Inc.

Smyth

C. C.

Dominessy

M. E.

(1988). Comparison of oculometer and head-fixed reticle with voice or switch and touch panel for data entry on a generic tactical air combat display. Unpublished manuscript not submitted for publication.