By Topic

A comparison of visual and kinesthetic-tactual displays for compensatory tracking

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$33 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

3 Author(s)
Richard J. Jagacinski ; Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, Human Performance Center, Columbus, OH 43210 ; John M. Flach ; Richard D. Gilson

Research on manual tracking with a kinesthetic-tactual (KT) display suggests that under certain conditions it can be an effective alternative or supplement to visual displays. In order to better understand how KT tracking compares with visual tracking, both a critical tracking and a stationary single-axis tracking task were conducted with and without velocity quickening. In the critical tracking tasks, the visual displays were superior; however, the quickened KT display was approximately equal to the unquickened visual display. In stationary tracking tasks, subjects adopted lag equalization with the quickened KT and visual displays, and mean-squared error scores were approximately equal. With the unquickened displays, subjects adopted lag-lead equalization, and the visual displays were superior.

Published in:

IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics  (Volume:SMC-13 ,  Issue: 6 )