Compatibility and consistency in aircrew decision aiding

Abstract

A group of 32 subjects performed a flight-control task while responding to between one and four analog indicators that were formatted as either command or status-decision aid displays. The results obtained indicate the advantage of the status format when subjects are required to verbally support the state of the indicator(s), in part, because the command format 'bypasses' the representation of the indicator's state from which the command was derived. No advantage is noted for either format in the case where the subjects are required to manually correct the state indicated. The importance of consistency in system-design efforts may exceed that of compatibility.