Heather F. Neyedli

Beyond Identity: Incorporating System Reliability Information Into an Automated Combat Identification System

Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate display formats for an automated combat identification (CID) aid. Background: Verbally informing users of automation reliability improves reliance on automated CID systems. A display can provide reliability information in real time. Method: We developed and tested four visual displays that showed both target identity and system reliability information. Display type (pie, random mesh) and display proximity (integrated, separated) of identity and reliability information were manipulated. In Experiment 1, participants used the displays while engaging targets in a simulated combat environment. In Experiment 2, participants briefly viewed still scenes from the simulation. Results: Participants relied on the automation more appropriately with the integrated display than with the separated display. Participants using the random mesh display showed greater sensitivity than those using a pie chart. However, in Experiment 2, the sensitivity effects were limited to lower reliability levels. Conclusion: The integrated display format and the random mesh display were the most effective displays tested. Application: We recommend the use of the integrated format and a random mesh display to indicate identity and reliability information with an automated CID system.

Joint Simon Effects in Extrapersonal Space

ABSTRACT Numerous studies have revealed that when people sit next to each other and complete separate parts of a Simon task, response times are shorter when the participants’ stimulus appears in front of them than when the stimulus appears in the opposite side of space. According to the action co-representation account of this joint Simon effect (JSE), participants represent each others responses and the compatibility effects emerge because of a set of facilitatory and inhibitory processes that are similar to those that are activated when individuals perform the entire Simon task alone. D. Guagnano, E. Rusconi, and C. A. Umiltà (2010) argued against this account as the sole mechanism based on their finding that a JSE was not observed when participants sat outside of each others peripersonal space. Notably, the task in the Guagnano et al.s was a modified version of the conventional JSE task designed to increase the independence of the partners. Here, we reconsider the arguments of Guagnano et al. and report a study in which the authors failed to replicate their key finding. Considering the extant JSE literature, we conclude that the null effect in Guagnano et al.s study may be an anomaly and that co-representation remains a leading candidate for the critical process underlying JSEs.

The processes of facilitation and inhibition in a cue-target paradigm: insight from movement trajectory deviations.

Several researchers have examined the trajectories of aiming movements in cue-target paradigms to investigate the motoric and attentional underpinnings of the inhibition of return (IOR) effect. The results of separate studies have revealed inconsistent patterns of trajectory deviations. These discrepancies may have arisen because the studies used narrow ranges of cue-target onset asynchronies (CTOAs) which may have prevented the time courses of facilitation and inhibition effects to be fully assessed. The present study was designed to conduct an examination of temporal and spatial characteristics of aiming movements over a broader range of CTOAs to provide a more comprehensive assessment of the potential expression of attentional and motoric contributions to cuing effects. Participants aimed to targets which were preceded by a non-predictive cue at CTOAs of 100, 350, 850, and 1100 ms. Analysis of spatial and temporal characteristics of the movements revealed facilitatory and inhibitory cuing effects in the trajectories, but only inhibitory cuing effects in RT. Further, the inhibitory effects in RT appeared at a shorter CTOA than the inhibitory effects in trajectories. This pattern of results suggests that the inhibitory mechanisms underlying IOR affect both attention and motor systems, but that these effects are displaced in time.

On Mechanisms, Methods, and Measures: A Response to Guagnano, Rusconi, and Umiltà

On Mechanisms, Methods, and Measures: A Response to Guagnano, Rusconi, and Umilta Timothy N. Welsh a b , Dovin Kiernan a , Heather F. Neyedli a , Matthew Ray a , Jay Pratt b & Daniel J. Weeks c a Faculty of Kinesiology and Physical Education , University of Toronto , Ontario , Canada b Department of Psychology , University of Toronto , Ontario , Canada c Department of Psychology , University of Lethbridge , Alberta , Canada Published online: 06 Feb 2013.