Circular displays: control/display arrangements and stereotype strength with eight different display locations

Abstract

Two experiments are reported that were designed to investigate control/display arrangements having high stereotype strengths when using circular displays. Eight display locations relative to the operator and control were tested with rotational and translational controls situated on different planes according to the Frame of Reference Transformation Tool (FORT) model of Wickens et al. (2010). (Left. No, Right! Development of the Frame of Reference Transformation Tool (FORT), Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 54th Annual Meeting, 54: 1022–1026). In many cases, there was little effect of display locations, indicating the importance of the Worringham and Beringer (1998. Directional stimulus–response compatibility: a test of three alternative principles. Ergonomics, 41(6), 864–880) Visual Field principle and an extension of this principle for rotary controls (Hoffmann and Chan (2013). The Worringham and Beringer ‘visual field’ principle for rotary controls. Ergonomics, 56(10), 1620–1624). The initial indicator position (12, 3, 6 and 9 o'clock) had a major effect on control/display stereotype strength for many of the six controls tested. Best display/control arrangements are listed for each of the different control types (rotational and translational) and for the planes on which they are mounted. Data have application where a circular display is used due to limited display panel space and applies to space-craft, robotics operators, hospital equipment and home appliances.