J~iri] - DTIC

Technlc~ Paper 362 ]-

EFFECTS OF ILLUMINATION LEVEL ANDSENSE OF DIRECTION ON LAND

NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE

Joseph I. Peters, Paul R. Bleda, andMichael L Fineberg

ENGAGEMENT SIMULATION TECHNICAL AREA

r’~

J~iri] Pt

C~)

U. S. ArmyResearch Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

May 1979

Approv.d for public r.lsss. ; dj pt ri but ion un l imi ted .

‘9 ~~‘I i~

U. S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

- FOR TH E BE HA VI ORA L AN D SOCIAL SCI ENC ES

A Field Operating A gency under the Jurisdiction of theDeputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

WILLIAM L. HAUSE RJ OSEPH ZEI DNER Colonel , US Arm yTechnical Director Command er

NOTICES

DISTRIBUTION. Pvim ry distri bution of this report h been med. by API. Plus . sddre.s corr.spondenc*co ncern ing distribution of reports to: U. S. Army Puurcb Instit ute for the Bshsv ior.I and Social Sciences.ATIN: PERI-P , 5001 E.senhov ~er Avenue , Alexa ndri a , Virgi nia fl333

FINAL. DISPOSITION: This report may be destroy ed w$~en it is no longer needsd. Pie., do not return it tothe U. S. Army Rs,.rch Institu te for the Beltevior.l and Social Sciences.

~Q~j The findings in thi s report are not to be construed us en official Department of the Army position,unless so designated by oth er euthorited documents.

UnclassifiedSECURITY CLASS IFICATION OF THIS PAGE (~~~

i~~~

D.~. &,t.~~d) __________________________________

~~~~~~~ I%#~# I ~~ ~~~A~~’I1~ I.5 I~~A~~~~ READ INSTRUCTIONS

It F UIt S tJ’Jt..UMCI~ I A U lUll UAU~~ BEFORE COMPLETIN G FORMI, p5PQPSMUM$I.R ...-

~~~ ~J2. GOVT ACCESSION NO 3. RECIPIENT’S CATALOG NUMBER

Te~~~~~.~~!J’aper,,P62 ~ .J- ~ _______________________

4. ;i E (aid SubUst.)~~~~/ ,~-( , 7

f~~~ ‘~1 5. TYPE OF REPORT C PERIOD COVERED

- ILLUMINATION LEVEL~~ SENSE OF pIREcTIcN~~~~~~ --

LAND NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE• ‘~ e. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMBER

I. AUTHOR(.) . .. 5. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMBER(.)

Joseph 1./Peters , Paul R./Bleda/ and _________

Michael L /Fineberg / f / ,~ (

\~~ I f - - ~~~ —

3. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS tO. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT , TASK

U.S. Army Research Institute for the Behavioral , , ,~

and Social Sciences / 2Q163743A7745001 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 223~~

‘ -~~ ~~._.. -~

II. CONTROLLING OFFI CE NAME AND ADDRESS .~~. I2~ P -

U.S. Army Forces Coninand ~ May 0799th Infantry Division, Fort Lewis, WA

IS. NUMBEROF PAG ES

14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME C ADORESSO1 dUf.ren l fto Ccntrofllng OllIc.) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (of hi. r.post)

Unclassified

IS.. DECLASSIFICATION/DOWNGRADINGSCHEDULE ——

IS. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT (of skI. R.porl)

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

17. DISTRISUTION STATEMENT (of A. .b.lz.ct .nt.r.d Sn Block 20. II dllf .rw I lr~~. R.port)

IS. SUPPLEM ENTARY NOTES

13. KEY WORDS (Caoth iu. sr. ,.. aid. If n.c...My id ld.nllfy by block ni b.r)Sense of direction Night simulation Night maneuversSpatial orientation Reverse cycle training Self-assessmentContinuous combat Navigation assessment techniquesDead reckoning Navigation speed IlluminationLight-attenuating device (LAD) Navigation accuracy Land navigationii A STMACT (‘s—— ,. ~~ee ~~~~~ W ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ Id.~~Ifr by block m bar)

The ability of foot soldiers to move at night affords unique militaryadvantages (a) because of the natural cover provided by darkness and (b) be-cause it allows the Army to perform continuous (around the clock) operations.

)This research quantitatively assessed the ability of infantrymen to performa navigation task in conditions of limited visibility without the aid ofnight vision devices. Simulation of night was also tested by having thesoldiers wear light-attenuating devices, and individual differences between —

(continued)

DO ~~~~~~ 103 EDU1ON Of I NOV aS s O SOS WTE UnclassifiedSEcURITY CLAI$IP1CAIION OF ThIS PASt (es. , Des. ~~ 5s.~~~

/

UnclassifiedSECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAOE(PP,s. Dee. Entered)

Item 20 (continued)

-~ good and poor navigators were studied with regard to the soldier’s personal— - history, attitudes, and performance on cognitive tests aimed at discriminat-

ing sense of direction. The experiment required 30 soldiers to perform adead—reckoning task to four checkpoints over a 2,330 m course in mountainousdesert. Ten soldiers navigated during the day, 10 navigated at night,and the remaining 10 navigated in the day but wore light—attenuating devicesto simulate night. Half the soldiers in each group had a poor sense ofdirection, according to their own self-ratings, and the other half a goodsense of direction.

The results indicated that although both navigation speed and accuracywere degraded to some degree, only navigation speed was significantly af-fected by night illumination. Compared to daylight performance, those inthe simulated night condition performed like those navigating in actualnight. Navigators with a good self-rated sense of direction tended toperform better than those with a poor self-rating. Among the tests andquestions correlated with performance, only items relating to navigationexperience were significant. Neither cognitive style nor items related tocity versus country childhood were predictive of navigation ability.

~~~~~~~~~~~ (i/ 0r

al.

UnclassifiedSECURITY CLASSIF ICATION OF THIS PAOE(lRIsn Des. Sneered)

Technical Paper 362

EFFECTS OF ILLUMINATION LEVEL ANDSENSE OF DIRECTION ON

LAND NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE

Joseph I. Peters, Paul R. Bleda, andMichael L. Flneberg

Angelo Mirabella, Team Chief

Submitted by:Frank J. Harris, Chief

ENGAGEMENT SIMULATION TECHNICAL AREA

Approved By:

A. H. Blrnbaum, ActIng DirectorORGANIZATIONS AND SYSTEMSRESEARCH LABORATORY

Joseph ZsIdnteTECHNICAL DIRECTOR

US. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES5001 Eisenhower A~~nu.. Alexandria , VirgInia 22333

Office, Deputy Chief of Staff for PersonnelDepartment of the Army

May 1979

Army Project Number Land Navigation20153743AT74

Appresed for psblc rdesss: ~ SV$bItIOn unlimited.

— -- - - -

ARI Research Reports and Technical Papers are intended for sponsors ofR&D tasks and other research and military agencies. Any findings ready forimplementation at the time of publication are presented in the latter part ofthe Brief. Upon completion of a major phase of the task, formal recornmen-dations for official action normally are conveyed to appropriate militaryagencies by briefing or Disposition Form.

FOREWORD

The Continuous Combat program of the Army Research Institute forthe Behavioral and Social Sciences (ARI) assesses human performance inmilitary operations that take place both day and night and particularlyexamines performance in land navigation. The purpose of the researchis to improve land navigation training with computer and simulationtechniques, to determine the behavioral differences in navigationabilities in order to define psychological principles behind good navi-gation skills, to develop a valid methodology for evaluating navigationperformance , and to determine the perceptual, cognitive , and emotionaleffects of day versus night ability on navigation. The research pro-gram is responsive to the requirements of the U.S. Army Forces Conmtand(FORSCOM) and is conducted under Army Project 2Q163743A774, Man-MachineInterface in Integrated Battlefield Control Systems, FY 1977 Work Pro-gram. The research reported in this report was directed by Dr. AaronHyman , chief of the Human Factors in Tactical Operations TechnicalArea.

This report explores differences in soldiers ’ land navigation per-formance during day, night , and simulated night conditions. Light at-tenuating devices ( LADs) were used for simulating night illuminationlevels under daylight conditions. Performance differences were alsoassessed between soldiers who rated themselves as having a good senseof direction versus those who rated themselves as having a poor senseof direction.

Supporting the research efforts were the 9th Infantry Division atFort Lewis, Wash., which was the FORSCOM sponsor ; and LTC D. Van Eynde,commander of the 2d Battalion , 39th Infantry. Mr. D. Dressel of ARIhelped t-~ plan and design the experiment.

Rclinical Director

ILLUMINATION LEVEL , SENSE OF DIRECTION , AND LANDNAVIGATION PERFORMANCE

BRIEF

Requirement:

The ability of foot soldiers to move at night provides the miii-tary advantages of natural cover provided by darkness and potentiallycontinuous (around the clock) operations. This research assessedquantitatively the ability of infantrymen to navigate under conditionsof limited visibility without the aid of night vision devices.

Simulation of nighttime conditions during the day would simplifyobservation of soldiers ’ night navigation performance . Simulation ofnight by having some soldiers wear light—attenuating devices (LADS)was tested.

Individual differences between good and poor navigators have im-plications for training as well as selection. Such differences werestudied with regard to the soldier ’s personal history , attitudes, andperformance on cognitive tests aimed at discriminating sense ofdirection.

Procedure:

Thirty soldiers performed a dead-reckoning task to four checkpointsover a 2,330 m course in mountainous desert. Ten soldiers navigatedduring the day, 10 navigated at night, and the remaining 10 navigatedin the day while wearing light-attenuating devices to simulate night.Half of the soldiers in each group were designated , according to theirown self-ratings, as having a poor sense of direction; the other halfdesignated themselves as having a good sense of direction. Soldiers’performance was evaluated on the basis of navigation speed and distanceerror in locating checkpoints. Navigation performance was correlatedwith the number of past exercises in navigation as well as scores fromstandardized tests of intelligence and cognitive style.

Findings:

Although both navigation speed and accuracy were reduced to somedegree , only navigation speed was significantly affected by night il-lumination. O~reral1, navigation times decreased by 40% at night.

Compared to daylight performance, those in the simulated nightcondition performed similarly to those navigating at night. That is,the light-attenuating devices significantly reduced navigation speedand, to a lesser degree, increased navigation error. Further testingis required to validate the devices more fully.

Navigators with a good self-rating for sense of direction per-formed consistently better than those with a poor self-rating. Theseresults were not significant, but indicate the need for more refinedresearch in this area.

Among the tests and questions, only navigation experience corre-lated significantly with performance. Neither cognitive style noritems related to city versus country childhood were predictive ofnavigation ability.

Utilization of Findings:

Troops who move tactically by night dead-reckoning can be expectedto lose up to 40% of their navigation speed in mountainous desertterrain.

The use of a light—attenuating device to simulate night will de-grade navigation performance in the same manner as actual night. Navi-gation speed is significantly reduced, with less reduction in navigationaccuracy. Filters which provide more light at the bottom of the lenswill not substitute for night completely but will simulate importantaspects of the night environment for training purposes.

Increased practice with navigation problems will increase sol-diers’ navigation proficiency. Soldiers who rated themselves as havinga good sense of direction tended to navigate better than those with apoor sense of direction; such ratings were highly correlated with thenumber of past navigation experiences.

ILLUMINATION LEVEL , SENSE OF DIRECTION , AND LANDNAVIGATION PERFORMANCE

CONTENTS

Page

BACKGROUND 1

METHODOLOGY 2

RESULTS 2

Illumination Variables 3Sense of Direction 5Prediction of Good Navigators Based on Demographic

and Cognitive Tests 9

CONCLUSIONS 10

TECHNICAL SUPPLEMENT 11

METHODOLOGY 11

Subjects 11Apparatus 11Pretests 12Experimental Design 12Procedure 13

RESULTS 14

APPENDIX A. CHECKPOINT MAP 19

B. HISTORY AND EXPERIENCE QUESTIONNAIRE 21

C. ORIENTATION QUESTIONNAIRE 25

D. SCHEDULE OF TESTING 31

E. INSTRUCTIONS TO EACH PARTICIPANT 33

DISTRIBUTION 35

- _ _ _ _

CONTENTS (Continued)

Page

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. ANOVA of navigation times 15

2. Mean leg navigation times (in minutes) 15

3. Mean route navigation times (in minutes) 16

4. ANOVA of checkpoint localization error 17

5. Mean checkpoint error (in meters) 17

6. Mean checkpoint error per leg (in meters) 18

LIST OF FIGU RES

Figure 1. Leg navigation times for three illumination groups . . 4

2. Checkpoint distance errors for threeillumination groups 6

3. Course navigation times for sense of directionand illumination groups 7

4. Checkpoint errors for sense of direction andillumination groups 8

5. Design used in land navigation experiments 13

—-_ - - -—.-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - - - - -.- - ~~~~~~~~-- ---

ILLUMINATION LEVEL, SENSE OF DIRECTION , ANDLAND NAVIGATION PERFORMANCE

BACKGROUND

The impetus for studying the land navigation proficiency of combatpersonnel derives from the evolution of the tactics and doctrine ofthe modern Army. According to current thinking, future battlef ieldswill not consist of large masses of troops in entrenched positions,but will be characterized by a fluid type of warfare. The outstandingfeature of mobile warfare is the multiplication of power by the rapidconcentration of forces at a certain point and at a certain time. Therelated doctrine of continuous combat specifies that tactical operationswill be conducted around the clock, under all types of weather condi-tions, and across various terrains. The evolution of mobile and con-tinuous combat tactics has brought with it an increasing demand forskill in land navigation and map interpretation. These demands weredetailed in an article in Infantry1 that classified the technical pro-ficiency requirements of infantrymen into two broad categories:(1) navigation and map use and (2) weapons proficiency.

This report describes the results of an experiment directed atthe study of navigation and map use. The experiment was designed toevaluate factors that affect development of training and selectionprocedures for increasing night mobility effectiveness of operationaltroops without the aid of expensive night vision devices.

The major purpose of this experiment was to obtain baseline mea-sures of navigation speed and accuracy as a function of day versusnight illumination levels. In addition , because of the increased em-phasis on maximizing night movement and the problems related to ob-serving navigation performance at night, the concept of simulated nightconditions was tested to provide a potentially useful technique foreasily assessing night performance during the day. This simulationof night was produced by equipping soldiers with light-attenuatingdevices (LADs) developed at ARI.

In addition, individual differences in navigation abilities amongsoldiers were studied. Although little is known about what makes agood navigator , evidence indicates that people can assess their own

Infantry Leader: Tactically and Technically Proficient. Infantry,January-February 1976, vol. 66, no. 1, 20-26.1

sense of direction rather well (Kozlowski & Bryant, ~977)•2 To vali-date this self-assessment technique, soldiers were divided into twogroups--good and poor--based upon their assessment of their sense ofdirc-ti ion (SOD). Much information could be obtained if, in fact, thegood—-as self-rated--soldiers navigated significantly faster or moreaccurately than the poor--as self-rated--soldiers. The source of suchdifferences in performance could be identified more easily , and theunderlying psychological principles could be applied to navigationtraining procedures as well as to selection of expert navigators.

To supplement the self—assessment procedure, a battery of testsand questions was given to determine if demographic or cognitive testscan predict who will be good navigators.

METHODOLOGY

Thirty soldiers were tested on a dead-reckoning navigation task.Ten soldiers navigated during the day , 10 navigated at night, andthe remaining 10 navigated during the day under simulated night condi-tions with the use of the LADs. Before they performed the navigationtask, the soldiers were administered a battery of cognitive tests andquestions cn their backgrounds and attitudes. Based on self-ratingsof sense of direction , half of the soldiers in each illumination con-dition were grouped as having a poor sense of direction, and the otherhalf were classified as having a good sense of direction.

For the navigation task, soldiers were given maps of the areawith their routes drawn on the maps. The route, located on the YakimaFiring Center Military Reservation near Yakima, Wash., extended 2,330 mthrough desert terrain and was divided into four separate legs. Themagnetic azimuths and metric distances to each of the four checkpointswere listed for the soldiers on the maps. Each soldier was requiredto lead the experimenter to each checkpoint.

RESULTS

The major purposes of this experiment were to determine the ef-fects of day versus night illumination levels on soldiers’ navigationspeed and accuracy and to validate the’ concept of using LADs to simu-late night conditiong. A secondary purpose was to determine if a sol-dier ’s assessment of his own sense of direction would reflect reliabledifferences in navigation performance. In addition , the experimentinvestigated the possibility that demographic background or performance

2Kozlowski, L. T., & Bryant, K. J. Sense Direction, Spatial Orien-tation , and Cognitive Maps. Journal of Experimental Psychology: HumanPerception and performance, 1977, vol. 3, no. 4, 590—598.

2

-~~- . ~~- .

on selected cognitive tests could predict good navigators. Navigationaccuracy was measured as the number of meters between the actual check-point and the location of the checkpoint as designated by the soldier.Navigation speed was measured in minutes for each leg of the route.Both the illumination conditions and the self-ratings of sense of di-rection were evaluated with these error and time measures, and thepredictive ability of the tests and demographic variables were as-sessed through correlational techniques.

Illumination Variables

There was an overall degradation in performance as a result ofthe nighttime conditions. Although such a degradation was not sur-prising, the data and field observations of navigation behavior pro-vided interesting insights. For example, although both speed andaccuracy diminished at night, the analysis indicated that only navi-gation speed was degraded by a significant degree. Such results didnot support the expectation that darkness would cause more soldiers to“get lost” as would be indicated by significantly poorer performancein both navigation speed and accuracy. As with night illumination ,the simulated night conditions produced by the LADs also degraded navi-gation performance. Such degradation supports the validity of theLADs as a possible research and training tool.

Figure 1 presents the mean navigation times for the Day, LAD,and Night groups in each of the four legs of the route. When measuredacross the legs, these times reflected significant differences amongall groups. As one would predict, the Day group had the fastesttimes, and the Night group had the slowest times. On the average,navigation time increased 40% under night conditions. A standard of3,000 m was used as a probable distance required for travel near enemylines, and a linear relationship was assumed between navigation timeand distance. Thus, the data project the daylight travel times wouldbe 47 minutes, compared to 67 minutes at night. This represents a20-minute difference for a relatively easy dead-reckoning task in openterrain.

The LADs used in the experiment were designed to reduce the am-bient light level to that of a partially moonlit evening. Because theLADs had not been tested previously in the field , safety considerationsrequired the use of bidensity filters in the LADs. These filters pro-vided more light at the bottom of the lens so that soldiers could moreeasily verify their footing; however, these filters prevented seeingdistant land cues with equal ease. The data in Figure 1 suggest thateven after the novelty effects wore off (represented in Leg 1), theLADs still degraded the soldiers’ navigation speed to a significantdegree. Apparently, however, the safety feature of the bidensity con-cept allowed soldiers to travel signific~ntly faster than those travel-ing in actual night conditions. If the safety feature had not beenused , performance times of the LAD and Night groups probably wouldnot have differed.

3

--- ----

~

—- .- - - -

In>-

— 0_J Ii

W i ~;

I

I I I I I I I —IJ~

S~JI3W 005 UJd NIW

4

Figure 2 presents the mean checkpoint distance errors of the threeillumination groups for each leg of the route. Those navigating atnight had a 60% greater error in locating the checkpoints than didthose navigating by day. Performance of the LAD group generally fellbetween performances of the Day and Night groups. Although the relativeperformance of the groups was as predicted, the statistical analysisindicated that, unlike navigation times, the average checkpoint errorswere not significantly different. The simplicity of the dead—reckoningtask combined with the “easy” line-of-sight navigation conditions ap-pear to have made navigation accuracy less of a problem than navigationspeed. Had the navigation route been in more difficult terrain withheavy woods that precluded line-of-sight navigation, checkpoint accu-racy might have been significantly affected by the illuminationconditions.

Sense of Direction

Soldiers who had rated themselves as having a good SOD tended tonavigate better than those who rated themselves as having a poor SOD.That is, although there were no statistically significant differencesbetween the groups, good SOD soldiers navigated more quickly and withless checkpoint error than poor SOD soldiers. An increase in the num-ber of soldiers tested might have resulted in group differences withthe desired statistical significance.

Figure 3 presents the average navigation times for the two SODgroups over the entire 2,330 in course. In comparing the groups acrossillumination conditions, one can see little difference between good andpoor SOD soldiers in the daylight condition. Under the simulated nightcondition (LAD) and the actual night condition, the poor SOD soldierstook about 25% and 16% longer, respectively, to navigate than did thegood SOD soldiers. Although such differences were not statisticallysignificant, it does appear that something, perhaps the stress in-duced by night conditions and especially the LAD’s simulation of night,reduced the navigation speed of the poor navigators.

Figure 4 shows the average checkpoint distance errors for thetwo SOD groups. Compared to good SOD soldiers, poor SOD soldiersmade consistently greater checkpoint distance errors across all il-lumination conditions. This was unlike the navigation speed measuresin which both good and poor SOD soldiers appeared to do equally wellunder daylight conditions. Overall, poor SOD soldiers displayed a15% to 20% greater error than good SOD soldiers. This difference wasnot statistically significant; however, the consistency across illumi-nation conditions lends support for further research on the validityof self—assessment techniques for selecting navigators.

5

InQ4I—..

m 0

~~ S04)

q -. .~. -I

r.e~S-I

SS

S

• 4)•

b• U)• — 11

0

• I u_i ai~~~~~~~~~~~ L)

4)U)-4-

N S• LI~

S•• U4)

—I

g , f • y •f-I ~~ O~ 00 1- 1.0 LA ~~f-I ~~

(S~1313W)

~lO~d3 IN!Od)133H3

6

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ---- - -

UI

1~~~ 4)(~J —I

-4—4-4

IIit — S

I— 0it —it Uit S14

it

\\

e~.~4)U)

8

I’ I’

(S3IONIW)3W!! N0I.LV9!MN 3SdflO3

7

h

4)it it —

‘ I— ~it Init

— 1.4

~~ 0it 4-I

it —I ~it ~_I 1.4it — 0it 1.4it 1.-I

S>_ 4)

it.., a0S8

(SdJ!JW)931 d3d ~0d~3 ‘!d)13 ‘

39AV8

Prediction of Good Navigators Based on Demographics and CognitiveTests

The adage that “country boys” are better navigators than “cityboys” was tested by correlating demographic data on the soldiers withtheir navigation performance. In addition to demographics, soldiers’responses to questions such as “How often do you go hiking?”, “Do youprefer to be the driver or passenger when riding in a car?”, and “Doyou like to read maps?” were correlated with actual performance. Al-so, soldiers’ scores on formalized tests such as the Witkin’s EmbeddedFigures Test and the Locations Test under the Armor Systems SelectionBattery were correlated with performance.

The results of these correlational analyses indicated that navi-gation experience displayed the strongest relationship with actualnavigation performance. Those who had been in the Army for 2 yearsor longer and those who had participated in more than seven field ex-ercises in land navigation performed significantly better than sol-diers with fewer years of experience or less practice in navigation.There was no evidence , however , that those who had lived in thecountry performed better than those who had grown up in an urban area.

As discussed above, those who rated themselves as having a goodSOD navigated consistently better than those with a poor self—ratingof SOD. In a further analysis of this phenomenon, it was found thatsoldiers with a better sense of direction regarded themselves as peoplewho inspect a map before departing on ..he auto trip, enjoy map read-ing, stay calm when they feel they are lost, and are good at remember-ing verbal directions.

From these results , good navigators appear to be more experiencedmap users and therefore more able to translate symbolic representationsof the terrain into a mental schema to which they can refer whilenavigating.

The correlations of performance with scores on the formalizedcognitive tests were not predictive of good navigators. The low cor-relation of performance with scores on the AFQT, Locations Test, andEmbedded Figures Test indicated that neither intelligence nor per-ceptual style contributed to good navigation performance . The trendof better performance among better self-rated navigators and the highcorrelation of such self—assessments with attitudes toward maps con-tribute to the evidence relating past experience with good navigationperformance. It also supports the conclusion that better navigatorsdo not have an innate homing or orientation instinct. In addition,having lived in rural areas does not imply exposure to more naviga-tional experiences, i.e., that “country boys” are better navigatorsthan “city boys.” The observed deficiencies in basic skills of corn-pass usage , map reading, and pace counting support a hypothesis thatpoor navigators have had insufficient experience to develop such skillsadequately .

9

- —~~~~~~- - - -—- --- ~~~- --- —-

CONCLUSIONS

Given a dead-reckoning task in desert terrain , soldiers ’ naviga-tion speeds will significantly decrease under nighttime conditions;however, navigation accuracy, although degraded, is not as seriouslyaffected. Navigation performance in a heavily wooded environment wasnot tested but could compound the task sufficiently that soldiers wouldindeed get lost.

Simulation of night with LAD can provide an observer with all theadvantages of daylight visibility while evaluating the night naviga-tion behavior of soldiers. The validity of the LADs for simulatingnight was supported by the significantly degraded navigation perform-ance of those who wore the device. Further testing of the LADs isneeded.

Soldiers who rated themselves as having a good sense of directionnavigated consistently faster and with fewer errors than those who .ratedthemselves as having a poor sense of direction. Although such differ-ences were not statistically significant, the trends in performancesuggest that the difficulty associated with more demanding navigationtasks may reveal the utility of self—evaluation for selection and train-ing purposes.

“Country boys” do not navigate better than “city boys.” An analy-sis of the soldiers’ backgrounds showed no significant relationshipbetween navigation performance and factors pertaining to childhood en-vironment. With regard to cognitive tests, neither general intelli-gence (AFQT) nor perceptual style (field dependence vs. independence)correlated highly with navigation performance.

Navigation experience correlated most highly with individual per-formance. Soldiers who had been in the Army more than 2 years and whohad had more than seven exercises involving land navigation demonstratedsignificantly better navigation performance. These results reinforcethe need for training by increasing the exposure of soldiers to actualnavigation problems.

10

- _ ~~~~~~~~~~-

.. - .~~~~- - - - ---

TECHNICAL SUPPLEMENT

METHODOLOGY

Subjects

One hundred soldiers were randomly selected from A , B , and C com-panies of the 2d Battalion , 39th Infantry at Fort Lewis, Wash. Fromthis number , 45 were selected as experimental candidates , of which 30were tested in the navigation task .

Apparatus

Light-Attenuating Devices (LADs). The LADs used in this experi-ment consisted of the standard protective field mask (Ml7Al) to whichlight—attenuating lenses were added as outserts. The lenses, orfilters , reduced the ambient light level to that of a partially moon-lit evening. Because these filters had not been tested in the field,a bidensity version of the filters was incorporated into the mask asa safety factor. Such filters provided more light at the bottom ofthe lens so that users could verify their footing more easily; how-ever , users could not see distant land cues with the same ease. Theupper portion of the lens attenuated the light by a factor of 5.5, andthe lower slit attenuated the light by a factor of 4.0.

Litton AN/PSN-6 Position Location System. This piece of equip-ment is a man—portable unit that provides position information to theuser in the form of LORAN time differences or universal transversemercator coordinates in eight digits . It was used in the Yakima ex-per iment to measure the lateral deviation of the navigator from thedesired course ; it was hoped that this instrument could provide a sig-nificant methodological breakthrough for assessment of navigationperformance.

Compass. A standard , government-issued lensatic compass withluminous dial was used by all soldiers.

~~~~~~. Each soldier was given an 8” x 10.5” map with approximately4 km2 represented on a scale of 1:10,000. The map is included as Ap-pendix A. The starting point and the legs to all four checkpointswere indicated on the map by thick yellow lines. The bottom rightcorner of the map listed both the magnetic azimuths and the requireddistance to be traveled to each checkpoint.

11

--, ~~- - ~~~~~~~ _ - - -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - -

Pretests

History and Experience Questionnaire. This was a brief, 22-itemque. ionnaire designed to obtain a geographic description of eachsoldier ’s childhood neighborhood and a description of both childhoodand Army navigation experiences. This questionnaire also providedinformation necessary to select experimental subjects for furthertesting to see if self—assessments of sense of direction predictedland navigation performance. The questionnaire is included as Ap-pendix B.

Orientation Questionnaire. This served as a followup to theHistory and Experience Questionnaire for those selected as experi-mental candidates. The questionnaire represents a slightly modifiedversion of that used by Kozlowski and Bryant (1977) in their researchon sense of direction. This questionnaire was used to see whethersoldiers ’ personal attitudes or habits about their own navigationas pedestrians and drivers could predict good and poor performers ina land navigation task. It is included as Appendix C.

Locations Test. This is part III of the U.S. Army Armor SystemsSelection Battery (Booklet Two). It measured the ability of soldiersto select correctly a photograph that was taken from the point of viewdesignated in a master photograph. Good performance in this test wasexpected to correlate highly with a soldier’s navigation abilities.

Armed Forces Qualifications Test (AFQT ). These percentiles wereobtained from Form 20 of the subjects’ 201 files.

Witkin’s Embedded Figures Test (EFT)--Form A. This is a per-ceptual test that measures field dependence—independence. It washypothesized that those who were more field-independent would bebetter navigators than those who were more field-dependent, becausethe former would be better able to use a map. That is, field-independent persons could better identify those features which de-fined their position and could better relate such features from amap to the corresponding terrai~~.

Experimental Design

The two major variables of this study were illumination condi-tions and sense of direction (SOD). Illumination conditions consistedof three groups--Day , LAD, and Night. The Day and Night groups per-formed the navigation tasks under prevailing daylight and nighttimeillumination conditions, respectively. The LAD group performed inthe same daylight conditions as the Day group but wore LADs to simu-late night conditions.

12

The second variable, sense of direction, was a measured variabledetermined by the soldiers’ responses to a question that asked themto rate how good they thought their SOD was on a 7-point scale. Thoseconsidered to have a good SOD scored between l and 3, and those clas-sified as having a poor SOD scored between 3 and 7. The overlap ofratings between groups was due to the substitution of a relativelyfew soldiers who rated themselves as poor in SOD with alternates whohad better SOD self—assessments.

Each subject was required to navigate to four checkpoints. Thefinal experimental design incorporated these checkpoints into thethird variable to produce a 2 x 3 x 4 (SOD x illumination x checkpoint)mixed , repeated-measures design for statistical analysis. Figure 5illustrates this design.

Checkpoints

Illumination SOD Se 1 2 3 41—

Good 5 _____ ______

6—Day Bad 10 _____ _____

11—Good 15

____ _____

16—r.An Bad 20

_____ _____

21—Good 25

_____ ______

Night 26-____________________

Bad 30 _____ ______

Figure 5. Design used in land navigation experiments.

Procedure

ARI scientists briefed 100 Fort Lewis soldiers on the nature ofthe experiment, which was to take place during night exercises at theYakima Test Firing Center. Soldiers who wore glasses were excused ,because sizing constraints prevented their wearing the LADs. Theremaining soldiers were informed that they had been chosen for fur-ther testing, that their names would be used for administrative andstatistical control purposes only, and that full confidentiality oftheir responses would be maintained.

13

The History and Experience Questionnaire (the f i rs t administered)included a question asking soldiers to rate how good they thought theirsense of direction was on a 7-point scale from Good to Bad. Forty-fivesoldiers with scores near the extremes of the scale were considered forfurther testing. Of these 45 soldiers , 15 were assigned to a “good ”sense of direction group, 15 were assigned to a “poor ” sense of direc-tion group, and the remainder served as alternates. All 45 soldierswere given the Locations Test before they were dismissed. Finally ,the experimenters obtained AFQT scores from existing test files.

All Fort Lewis pretesting was performed on a group testing basis.The remaining pretesting and experimental data collection took place1 week later at Yakima Firing Center on an individual basis. Eachsoldier was tested according to a standard procedure. The testingschedule is in Appendix D, and the instructions read to each soldierappear in Appendix E. The procedure involved introducing the problemto the soldier, administering the EFT test, and initiating the navi-gation task.

In performing the navigation task, each soldier was accompaniedby one or two experimenters. During the night and LAD conditions,the experimenter preset the lensatic compass to the correct az imuthfor each checkpoint so that the soldier was merely required to alignthe luminous compass guides. The experimenters stayed behind thenavigator so as not to influence the soldier’s direction of travel.At intervals of approximately 2 minutes, the soldier was asked tostop, remember his pace count, and wait as the experimenter recordedthe eight—digit coordinates supplied by the AN/PSN-6 Position LocationSystem. When the soldier arrived at where he thought the checkpointwas located, the experimenter recorded the time and measured the dis-tance between the proposed and actual checkpoint locations. The sol-dier was then brought to the actual checkpoint and directed to con-tinue to the next checkpoint.

RESULTS

Table 1 presents the summary statistics for the 2 x 3 x 4 (SOD xillumination x leg) ANOVA on navigation times. An analysis of thesignificant illumination main effect revealed that the Day groupnavigated significantly faster than the LAD group, which navigatedsignificantly faster than the Night group. Table 2 presents the meanleg navigation times, which show the main effect of the three illumi-nation groups.

In addition to the illumination main effect, there was a siqnifi-cant interaction between the illumination conditions and the specificlegs that comprised the route. Table 2 shows a significant deviationof the LAD group from the other illumination groups in the first legof the route. Only in the first leg does the LAD group perform atthe same level, if not a little worse, than the Night group. This

14

- - - - - -- -~~~ - - --r-- - . - _ - - - - - -

Table 1

ANOVA of Navigation Times

Source df MS F P

Between Se )I—(Illumination) 2 323967 4.30 .05D—(Sense of Direction) 1 182599 2.42 n .s .ID 2 67860 —— n .s .S(ID)—(Subjects) 24 75386

Within Ss

L—(Leg) 3 236961 25.03 .001IL 6 24429 2.58 .05DL 3 7397 -- n . s .IDL 6 8976 —— n.s .SL(ID) 72 9468

Table 2

Mean Leg Navigation Times (in Minutes)

Illumination Leg 1 Leg 2 Leg 3 Leg 4condition (510 M) (560 M) (530 M) (730 M)

Day 7.7 8.5 9.0 11.0LAD 11.3 9.6 9.6 13.4Nigh t 10.6 12. 2 11.0 14.4

15

probably occurred primarily because of the novelty effect of the LADs ;after the novelty had worn off, fidelity of night simulation was prob-ably better represented in the last three legs .

By collapsing the time scores across illumination conditions andfocusing on the average leg times alone, one can see that navigationtimes increased over the longer legs of the route. This is reflectedin Table 1 through the statistically significant main effect for leg.

Table 3 displays the mean route navigation times for good and poorsense of direction groups across the illumination conditions. With atotal N of 30, there was no significant difference between good andpoor self-rated navigators. The consistent trend for good SOD soldiersto do better than poor SOD soldiers, however, may justify further studyon the utility of self-assessments of sense of direction for predictingnavigation performance.

Table 3

Mean Route Navigation Times (in Minutes)

Illumination conditionsSense of directi~in Day LAD Night

Good 36.8 39.0 44.8Poor 35.8 48.7 51.9

Table 4 presents the ANOVA results for checkpoint localizationerror. Neither illumination nor sense c~. direction significantly af-fected this error. Table 5 provides the mean checkpoint errors (summedacross legs) for the sense of direction and illumination conditiofls.

The only variable having a significant effect on checkpoint errorwas route leg. Table 6 presents the mean checkpoint errors for eachleg, across each illumination condition. This table shows that as leglengths increased , the magnitude of checkpoint error also increased.

L ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Table 4

ANOVA of Checkpoint Localization Error

Source df MS F p

Between Ss

I—(Illumination) 2 10388 1.85 n.s.D—(Sense of direction) 1 98 —— n.s.ID 3 2186 —— n.s.S(ID)—(Subjects) 24 5613

Within Ss

L— (Leg) 3 10465 4.23 .05IL 6 1346 —— n.s .DL 3 3811 1.54 n . s .IDL 6 2622 1.06 n.s.SL(ID) 72 2471

Table 5

Mean Checkpoint Errora (in Meters)

Sense of direction Day LAD Night

Good 65 78 111Poor 76 88 96

aErrors were summed across checkpoints.

17

Table 6

Mean Checkpoint Error Per Leg (in Meters)

L..Illumination Checkpoint 1 Checkpoint 2 Checkpoint 3 Checkpoint 4conditions (510 m) (560 m) (530 m) (730 m)

Day 51 82 46 104T.arj 55 98 88 92Night 82 109 102 120

18

- —~—~~~~~~~ -—-.--——- --~~~~~~~~~

APPENDIX ACHECKPOINT MAP

H B

( &~~~2~’ \~AN~L/ I 4 1 I 1. 300

2. 240 560MI 3. 133 53011

19 4. 062 73011

- - -~~~~~~~ - ‘~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ --- ~~~~~~~~ - - - - ~~~~~ _ _ _

APPENDIX B

HISTORY AND EXPERIE!~ E QUESTIONNAIRE

NAME _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

NAME OFR ANK

_____________ IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR (i.e., who tells youyour orders) ____________________________

1. Age ___________

2. Height ______________

3. Weight _________

4. RighI~ or Left- Handed .

Right —

Left _____

5. Do you wear glasses during combat training?

Yes ____

No ____

6. How long have you been in the Army?

________ Years ________Months

7. How long have you been at Ft. Lewis?

________Years ________Months

8. Have you ever participated in an exercise at the Yakisia Firing Center?

Yes ________

No ________

9. Approximately how many classroom courses have you had which coveredthe topic of navigation?

_________________________

10. Approximately how many field exercises involving navigation have youparticipated in? ___________________________________

11. Before entering the Army , did you ever go hiking?(circle the most appropriate it~~ )

very veryrarely rarely sometimes frequently frequently

12. Before entering the Army , have you ever used a compass?


13. Were you ever a Cub Scout? ________

Yes _______

No

21

---~ ----- -- -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -.- - ~~~~ --~

14. Were you ever a Boy Scout? _______

Yes _______

No

15. Where did you live during i~~st of your childhood (From ages 5 to 12) ?

___________ Large City

___________ Small City

- Suburbs ____________

Rural

16. Wha t was the distance between your house and your nearest childhoodneighbor ’s house?

_______ Just a few yards (Less than 25 yards)

_______ A short walk (25 to 100 yards)

_______ A moderate walk (100 to 400 yards)

_______ A long walk (400 yards to 1 mile)

________ Within driving distance (Over 1 mile)

17. Which best describes the terrain of your childhood neighborhood ?

_________ Mountains

_________ Hills

_________ Flatland

_________ Wa terfront

18. Which best describes the growth around your childhood neighborhood ?

_________ Heavily Wooded

_________- Moderately Wooded

_________ Lightly Wooded

19. As a child, did you ever camp outside

(a) ... in your own neighborhood?


(b) ... away from your own nei~,hborhood?


20. Which would you say you were?

___________ “City Boy”

____________ “Country Boy”

22

_ _ _ _ -- - -

21. Which describes you the best?

________________ Athletic

______________ Studious

______________ Hobbyist

22. How good is your sense of direction?

Good ____

: ____

: ____

: ____ ____ : ____

: ____

Bad

23

APPENDIX C

ORIENTAT ION QUESTIONNAIRE

NAME _ _________

There are no correct or incorrect answers to these questions. Pleaseanswer thmn in order. Proceed quickly and do not go back to a previousanswer.

A note on filling out this questionnaire: Many questions are followedby answers in scale form. To answer, place a check mark in the spacethat best indicates your response.

Examples: How do you feel about falling down ten flights of stairs?

dislike C : _____

: _____

: B : _____

: _____

: A like

Response “A” : indicates that you like falling down stairs very much.

Response “B” indicates that you neither like nor dislike fallingdown stairs.

Response “C” : indicates that you strongly dislike falling down stairs.

1. How good is your sense of direction

(a) In the city?

GOOD ______

: ______ ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

BAD

(b) In the country:

GOOD ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

BAD

2. How good is your ability to judge distance?

GOOD ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

BAD

3. How good is your ability to judge time?

GOOD ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______ ______

: ______

BAD

4. How good is your memory for the following things :

(a) Places?

GOOD ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______ ______

: ______

BAD

(b) Faces?

GOOD _ _ _ _

: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

: _ _ _ _

:_ : _ _ _ _

: _ _ _ _

BAD

25

(c) Names?

GOOD _____

: _____

: _____

: _____

: _____

: _____

: _____

SAD

5. Pretend that you have a car readily available. If you’re in no hurry,how often will you walk rather than drive to a destination for thedistances listed below? Circle the correct response.

I will walk:

(a) Short distances (less than one mile)

very almostrarely rarely sometimes frequently always

(b) Medium distances (1 to 2 miles)


(c) Longer distances (More than 2 miles)


6. Do you drive? _____

Yes _____

No

7. a. Assume that you yourself know how to reach a particular destination.Would you enjoy giving directions to that destination to other people?

strongly stronglydislike

______ :

______ :

______ :

______ :

______ :

______ :

______ like

b. Do you think that you are good at giving other people directions?

Very VeryBad

______ :

______ :

______ :

______ :

______ :

______ :

______ Good

8. (a) In general, when driving a car , do you try whenever possible , to f indnew routes?


(b) In general, is it important that the new routes you take are moreefficient?

not somewhat moderately very extremelyimportant Importan t important important Important

(c) In general , is it important that the new routes you find are interesting?

not somewha t moderately very extremely

Impor tant important Impor tant important important

26

_ _ --—--- — - -—---- - -- -~~--

9. (a) In general, when walking, do you try, whenever possible, to find newroutes?


(b) In general, is it important that the new routes that you do find aremore eff ic ient?

not somewhat moderately very extremelyimportant important important important important

(c) In general, is it important that the new routes you find are interesting?

not somewhat moderately very extremelyimportant important important important important

10. Assuming that you are with someone who drives as well as you do , would yourather be the driver or passenger in a car?

______________________ Driver

_________________________ Passenger

11. Rate the following adjectives to describe how you feel when you are lost(i.e., when you do not know how to reach an anticipated destination).Assume that you would like to reach your destination soon, but that youhave no appointments.

anxious _____

: _____

: _____

: _____

: _____

: _____

: _____

not anxious

attentive _____

: ______

: _____

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

inattentive

calm ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

excited

good _____

: ______

: ______

: _____

: ______

: ______

: ______

bad

d espairing ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

: ______

hopeful

12. How good are you at following written directions to go to a place you havenever been before?

verypoor poor fair good excellent

13. How good are you at remembering verbal directions and using them to get toa place you have never been before?

verypoor poor fair good excellent

14. (a) Do you think you daydream more or less than the average person?

much less less same more much more

27

(b) Do you ever daydream while driving?


(c) Do you ever daydream while walking?

very veryrarely rarely sonetimes frequently frequently

15. When you are traveling through an area that you are unfamiliar with, doyou make a conscious effort to note new details in the landscape?

very almostrarely rarely sometimes - frequently always

16. When you are traveling through an area that you are unfamiliar with , do youmake a conscious e f fo r t to remember new details in the landscape?


17. (a) Have you ever had an experience where you felt tha t you have donesomething or been somewhere before, even when you know you haven ’t?


(b) With wha t intensity do you usually have this experience?

very veryweakly slightly moderately strongly strongly

18. When you are a passenger in a car, do you often remember the route youhave travelled?


19. After being a passenger in a trip through a medium sized city, do you thinkyou could redrive the route if the entire trip was :

(a) 5 minutes long _______

Yes _______

No(b) 15 minutes long

_______ Yes

_______ No

(c) 30 minutes long _______

‘!es _______

No(d) 1 hour long

_______ Yes

_______ No

(e) 2 hours long _______

Yes _______

No

20. Do you usually carry a watch with you?

_______ Yes

________ No

21. Do you prefer to be early or exactly on time for an appointment?

_________ Early __________

Exactly on time28

_ _ _ _

I

22. Do you enjoy reading maps?

Hate to _____

: _____

: _____

: _____

: _____

: _____

: _____

Really enjoy it

23. When driving to an unknown destination :

(a) Do you inspect a map before leaving?

very almostrarely rarely sometimes often always

(b) Do you use a map throughout your route?


(c) Do you ask for directions when you think you are near?


24. When referring to a map in your car , do you always keep the map r ight—side—upor do you turn the map in the direction of your travel?

__________ Right—side—up

__________ Direction of travel

25. When you were a little kid, do you ever recall becoming lost while you wereout on an adventure or exploring with a friend?

________ No , I can not recall this ever happening.

________ I remember it happening a couple of t imes , or was told it did .

________ I remember it happening many times, or was told it did .

26. Do you find traveling at night easier or more d i f f i c u l t than travelingduring the day ?

________ Day is easier

________ Night is easier

________ Both are the same

27. On a trip, which would you rather be: the driver ; the map reader ; or

a passenger. Circle your choice.

29

________

APPENDIX D

Schedule of Testing

Illumination SODDate Time Group Group Sublect No.

31 May 77 1035 DAY Good 261340 LAD Good 282000 NIGHT Good 29 A

1 Jun 7’ 1410 DAY Poor 151630 LAD Poor 142300 NIGHT Poor 13

2 Jun 77 1335 DAY Good 30“ 1617 LAD Good 20

2213 NIGHT Poor 13 Jun 77 1410 LAD Good 276 Jun 77 1348 LAD Good 16

1555 DAY Good 172227 NIGHT Good 18

7 Jun 77 1400 LAD Poor 101700 DAY Poor 92200 NIGHT Poor 8

8 Jun 77 1430 LAD Good 251640 DAY Good 242200 NIGHT Good 23

9 Jun 77 1315 LAD Poor 121525 DAY Poor 112215 NIGHT Poor 2

10 Jun 77 1330 LAD Good 21“ 1530 DAY Good 22

12 Jun 77 2200 NIGHT Good 192345 NIGHT Poor 7

13 Jun 77 0200 NIGHT Poor 614 Jun 77 1030 DAY Poor 3

“ 1230 LAD Poor 41400 DAY Poor 5

31

APPENDIX E

INSTRUCTIONS TO EACH PARTICIPANT

I’m Dr. ____________ from the Army Research Institute in Alexandria,VA. You ’ve been specially selected from all of the people in yourbattalion to help us in this study of land navigation. We are trying tofind out how to help the Army teach people tu ~~vigate more accurately.During the next 2 1/2 hours you will be asked n series of questions,given the opportunity to compete on a challenging land navigation problemand asked to participate in two simple exercises related to your abilityto locate both yourself and some figures in relation to the surroundingarea .

The f i r s t part of our time is devoted to finding out how you feelabout the upcoming tests. I am going to give you a list of words and youare to decide whether or not each word describes the way you feel rightnow about the next 2 hours of testing. Please print your name, date,and time on the front of this paper , and then, carefully read theinstructions. When you have done so, let me know. O.K.,here is the list of adjectives which might describe how you feel aboutthe upcoming test. Please go down the list and check those words whichdescribe your present feelings.

The next exercise is designed to tell how well you can pick importantfeatures out of a map or out of the real terrain. It ’s called the Witkin’sEmbedded Figures Test. Please come with me to where we can sit downand be comfortable because this will take about 30 minutes.

(ADMINISTER EFT)

Now, I’d like you to study this little map. The yellow line indicatesthe route you are to follow in your navigation exercise. Map study ismost effective when you note the relationship of the check points to thesurrounding terrain. For example , note that there are four legs in yourtest route each ending at a checkpoint. Note also that the start pointis right near a road and about 200 meters south of an intersection. Youwill also notice that the compass heading and distance are given for e.~chleg of the route. Do you know how to use a compass? (IF NOT, GIVE BRIEFINSTRUCTION) .

Do you know your pace count? ( IF S ANSWERS YES OR NO GIVE THEN THEOPPORTUN ITY TO PACE ALONG TAP E MEASURE AND VERIFY WHAI HIS COUNT IS’ ~)

O.K., now let me tell you what the basic procedure will be. Whenwe’re ready to go, I will lead you to the starting point. There, youwill inspect your map , shoot your azimuth and note your distance to betraveled . When you are ready to begin just start and I will follow you .As you walk the course , I will stop you every few minutes in order to takea reading from the LORAN system (EXPLAIN 1’~RAN IF NECESSARY). Since Iwill be stopping you every so often , it quite possible that you willlose your attention and forget your pace count. Please note this possibilityand try to prevent it f rom happening .

33

As you are traveling, you can stop as of ten as necessary to check yourcompass. When you think you have reached the checkpoint , let me know .

REMEMBER Even though the start point is obviously marked with apile of rocks and a stake, t~ e checkpoints may not be so obivous .Therefore , rely mostly on your compass and pace count, and use your map tover i fy your position . DON ’ T RELY ON LOOKING FOR MAN-MADE MARKERS .

Do you have any questions?

O.K., please carefully study your map for the next few minuteswhile I get prepared .

(AFTER 15 S HAVE BEEN RUN)I want you to look at this (YAKIMA ORIENTATION TEST) and read theinstruction carefully because this is what I want you to fill outwhen we finish the navigation exercise. (EXPLAIN CAREFULLY)

LAD’S GROUP: Because of special abilities which showed up in the testsyou took, you have been assigned to the experimental group which getsto wear the night simulation devices. If you’ll put on the protectivemask now , I ’ll tell you how it works .

(PUT S ON MASK)

The lenses of the mask are treated with special coatings whichreduce the bright sunlight to the level of half moon. In a few minutes ,you will be able to see pretty well again. You’ll notice that at thebottom of each lens is a slit which appears a little brighter than therest. This is so you can read your map and compass, and so you can lookat the ground just in front of you so that you won’t fall into holes orsomething worse. This slit is not to be used ~o view straight ahead,but only to look down . Now , I want you to sit down beside the goat fora while so you can adapt to the darkness in peace (15 minutes).

NIGHT GROUP: Because of special abilities which showed up in the testsyou took, you have been assigned to the experimental group which gets towork the night navigation problem .

DAY GROUP: Because of special qualities that showed up in the tests youtook , you have been assigned to our control group whose job is to setstandards for the others to follow.

34

DISTRIBUTION

AR I Distribution List

4 OASD (M&RA) 2 HOUSACDEC, Ft Ord, ATTN: Library2 HODA (DAMI.CSZ) 1 HQUSACDEC, Ft Ord, A TT’N: ATEC—EX — E—Hum FactorsI HODA (DAPE.PBR) 2 USAEEC , Ft Beni.~~sj n Herriton, ATTN: Lib raryI HODA (DAMA-AR I 1 USAPACDC. Ft Benjamin Harrison , ATTN: ATCP—H RI HODA (DAPE-HRE.FQ) 1 tISA Comm—Elect 5ch, FtMo nmo uth , ATTN: ATSN—EA1 HQDA (SGRO-ID) I USAEC, Ft Moni~~uth , A’fl ’N: A MSEL—CT—HD P1 HQQA (DAMI.DOT’C) I USAEC, Ft Mo~~nouth , ATTN: AMSE L—PA—P1 HQDA (DAPC-PMZ.A) 1 USAEC, Ft Monesouth, ATTN: AM$EL,—Sl—CB1 HQOA (DACH-PPZ-A, 1 USAEC , Ft Monmouth, ATTN: C, Fad Div Br1 HQOA (DAPE.HR€ ( 1 USA Materials Sys Anal Agcy, Aberdeen, ATTN: AMX SV—P1 HODA (DAPE.MPO.C( I Edgewood Arien~ , Aberdeen, ATTN: SAREA —BL — H1 HODA (DAPE-Dw l 1 USA Ord Ctr & 5th, Aberdeen, ATTN: ATSL — TEM— C1 HODA (DAPE.HRL) 2 USA Hum Engr Lab, Aberdeen, ATTN: Library/D ir1 HQDA (DAPE.CPS( 1 USA Combat Amis Tng Bd, Ft Benning, ATTN; Ad Supervisor1 HQDA (DAFD-MFAI 1 USA Infantry Hwn Rich Unit , Ft Banning, ATTN: Chief1 HODA IDARO.ARS.Pl I USA Infantry ~d. Ft Banning, ATTN: STEBC—TE—T1 HODA (DAPC-PAS-Al 1 USASMA. Ft Bliss , AT’TN: ATSS—LRC1 HODA (DUSA-OR) 1 USA Air Dci Sds. Ft B liss , ATTN: ATSA—CTD --ME1 HQDA (DAMO-RQR) 1 USA Air Oaf $di. Ft Bliss, ATTN : Tech Lib1 HQDA (DASGI I USA Air Del Bd. Ft Bliss , ATTN: FILES1 HODA (DAb -Ph 1 USA Air Oaf Bd, Ft Bliss , ATTN : STEBD—PO1 Chi.f. Consult Div IDA-OTSGI, Adeiphi, MD I USA Cmd & General Sri Collage, Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: Lib1 Mu Azat. Hum Res, ODDR&E , OAD IE&LSI 1 USA Cmd & General Stf College , Ft Leavenworth, ATTN: ATSW—SE—L1 HO USARAL , APO Seattle , ATTN: ARA C P R 1 USA Cmd & General Sri College . Ft Leavenworth , A11’N: Ed Advisor1 HO Firt t Army, ATTh: AFKA-OI.Tl 1 USA Combined Aims Cmbt Day Act , Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: DepCdr2 HO Fifth Army, Ft Sam Houston I USA Combined Anns Cmbt Dcv Act . Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: CCS1 Dir , Army Sri Stsadie~ Oft , ATTN OA’~CSA lDSP 1 USA Combined kms Cmbt Div Act , Ft Leavenworth , ATTN: ATCASA1 Oft Chief of Sri , St udies Ofc 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbt Dcv Act , Ft Leavenwort h. A1’TN : ATCACC —E1 DCSPER , AT’TN: CPS/OCP 1 USA Combined Arms Cmbt Day Act . Ft Leavenwor t h , ATTN: AT CACC—CtI The Army Lb . Pentagon . ATT N RSB Chief 1 USAECOM . Ni~~it Vision Lab , Ft Belvo ir , ATTN: AMSEL—NV—S DI The A” i,y Lib , Pentagon . ATTN ANRAL 3 USA Compu ter S,’s CmO , Ft Belvoir , ATTN: Tech Library1 Oft , Aut Sect of the Army (R&D ) 1 USAMEROC , Ft Selvo ir . ATTN STSFB—DQI Tech Suppor t Ofc , OJCS 1 USA Eng 5th, Ft Selvoi r . A TTN: L brary1 USASA . Arlington , ATTN: lA RD~T 1 USA Topographic Lab. Ft Balvoir , ATTN: ETL~~TD—S1 USA Rich Oft , Durham , ATTN: Life Sciences Dir 1 USA Topographic Lab . Ft Belvo r . All N: STINFO Center2 USARIEM , Natick . ATT N: SGRD.UE.CA 1 USA Topographic Lab , Ft Be lvoir . ATTN ETL— GSI.I USATTC. Ft Clayton . ATTN: STETC.MO-A 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch. Ft Huechuc a . ATTN : CTD—MS1 USAIMA . Ft Bragg, ATTN: ATSU.CTD.OM 1 USA Inte lli gence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , ATTN~ ATS—CTD—M SI USAIMA . Ft Bragg, ATTN: Me~quat Lib 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , ATTN : ATS I—TEI US WAC Ctr & 5th . Ft McClellan . ATTN : Lib I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca , ATTN: AT SI—TEX—G SI US WAC Ctr & Sch, Ft McClellan , A TTN: Tng Dir 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huechu ca , ATTN : A TS I—CT S— ORI USA Quartermaster Sch , Ft Lee , ATTN : ATSM.TE 1 USA lntehi.gence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca . ATTN: ATS I—CTD—DTI Intelli gence Material Div Oft , EWL . Ft Hola bird 1 USA Intelli gence Ctr & Sch . Ft Huachuca , ATTN: ATSI—CTD—C51 USA SE Signal Sth , Ft Gordon, ATTN : ATSO EA I USA lntelhigenceCtr & Sch, Ft Huachuca , ATTN: DAS/SRD1 USA Chaplain Cu & 5th . Ft Hamil ton , ATTN: ATSC-T E-RD 1 USA lntelli ge rice Ctr & Sch. Ft Huachuc i . ATTN: ATS I—TEM1 USATSCH , Ft Eust ii . ATTN : Educ Advi sor 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sch , Ft Huachuca . ATTN : Library1 USA War College, Carlisle Barracks , A TTN : Lib I COP, HO Ft Huad~uca , ATTN: Tech Ref Div2 WRAIR , Neuropsychiatry Div 2 COR , USA Electr on ic Pryg Grd , ATTN: STEEP—MT—SI DLI, SDA . Monterey 1 HO, TCAT A. A’TTN: Tech LibraryI USA Concept Anal Aqcy, Bethesda, A’fl’N: MOCA-MR 1 HO. TCATA . ATTh : AT CAT.OP.O. Ft Hood

1 USA Concept Anal Agcy. Bethesda , A’fl’N: MOCA.JF I USA Recruiting Cnrd, Ft Sheridan, A’fl’N: USARCPM.PI USA Arctic Test Cu. APO Seattle, ATTN: STEAC.PL-Ml 1 Senior Army Ade., USAFAGOD/T AC , Elgin AF A ux FId No. 91 USA Arctic Test Cu, APO Seattle, ATTN: AMSTE-PL-1’5 I HO, USARPAC. DCSPER , APO SF 96558, ATTN : GPPE-SEI USA Arma ment Cmd , Redstone Ars enal , A71’N: ATSK-TEM 1 Stlmion Lib , A~~~~my of Health Sciences, Ft Sam HoustonI USA Armament Cmd, Rock li lend , ATFN: AMSAR -TDC 1 Marine Corps h iss.. ATTN: Dean-MCII FAA’NAFEC. Atlantic City. ATTN : Library 1 HO, USMC. Comuiendent. A’TTN: Code MTMTI FAA.NAFEC, Atlantic City. ATTN: Human Engr Br 1 HO. USMC . Coii~~indant , ATTN : Code MPl-2O~281 FAA Aeronautical Ctr , Oklahoma City, ATTN: AAC’44D 2 USCG Academy. New London, A’fl’N: Admission2 USA FId Arty $ds, Ft Sill, ATTN: Library 2 USCG Academy. Maw London, A’fl’N: LibraryI USA Armor 5th, Ft Knox, A ’rrN: Library I USCG Tra4nlng Cs!, NY , ATTN: COI USA Armor 5th, Ft Knox , ATTN : ATSB-Dl-E 1 USCG Training Cs,. NY , AT1’N: Educ Sec OfcI USA Armor 5th, Ft Knox . AiTh: ATSB.DT-TP I USCG, Psythol Rea Br. DC , ATTh: GP 1/62I USA Armor Sdi. Ft Knox , A’fl ’N: AT$8-CD’AO 1 HO Mld’Range ~~~, MC Oct . Quentico. ATTN: P&S Div

35

1 US Marine Corps Lia ison Ofc, AMC. Alexandria. ATTN: AMCGS—F 1 Oaf & Civil Inst of Env iro Medicine , CanadaI USATRADOC, Ft Monroe, AT1’N: ATRO—ED 1 AIR CRESS, Kensington, ATTN: Info Sys Br6 USATRADOC, Ft Monroe, ATTN: ATP R—AD j Militaerpsykologisk Tierie,t., Copenhagen1 USATRADOC. Ft Monroe, ATrN: ATTS—EA 1 Military Attache, French Embassy, ATIN: Dot SecI USA Forces Cmd. Ft Ud5hscson, ATTN: Library I Medscin Chat. C,E,R,P.A.—Arsenal . Taylor/Naval France2 USA Aviation Test Bd, Ft Pucker , ATTN: STEBG—PC 1 Prin Scientific Oft, Appl Hum Engr Rich Div . Minist ry

1 USA Agcy for Aviation Safety, Ft Pucker , A’fl N: Libra ry of Defense. New Delhi1 USA Agcy for Aviation Safety, Ft Pucker , ATTN: Educ Advisor 1 Pars Pith Oft Library, AKA . Israe l Defense Forces1 USA Aviation Sd~, Ft Pucker , ATTN: P0 Drawer 0 1 Minusteris van Defansie, 000P/KL Aid SociaalI HQUSA Aviation Sys Cmd, St Louis, A’fl ’N: AM SAV—ZDR Psychologische Zaken , The Hague. Netherlands

2 USA Aviation Sys Test Act., Edward s AFB. A’fl’N: 5AVTE—T1 USA Air Oaf Sch. Ft Bibe. AT1’N: ATSA TEM1 USA Air Mobility Rich & Dcv Lab, Motfatt FId , A’fl’N: SAVOL—ASI USA Aviation 5th. Re, Trig Mgt, Ft Pucker , ATTN: ATST—T—PTM1 USA Aviation $ch. CO. Ft Pucker, ATIN: ATST—O— A1 HO, DAPCOM . Alexandria, ATI’N: AMXCD—TLI HO, DARCOM , Alexandria. A’fl ’N: COP1 US Military Academy, West Point, ATTN: Serials Unit1 US Military Academy, West Point, ATTN: Ofc of Milt Ldrshp1 US Military Academy, West Point, A’fl’N: MAOR1 USA Standardization Gp, UK , FPO NY, A’fl ’N; MAS E—GC1 (Ac of Naval Rich, Arlington. ATTN: Code 4523 Oft of Naval R ich , Arlington, ATTN: Code 458I Ofc of Naval Rich, Arlington, A’fl’N: Code 4501 Ofc of Naval HICh, Arlington , ATTN: Code 441I Naval Aeroepc t.~r-l Re, Lab, Pensacola , ATrN: Acous Sch DivI Naval Aerospc Med Pet Lab, Pensacola, ATFN: Code L51I Naval Aerospc Med Ret Lab, Pensacola , ATTN: Code L51 Chief of NavPers , ATTN: Par. OR1 NAVAIRSTA , Norfolk , ATTN: Safety Cu1 Nev Oceanographic, DC, A’fl’N: Code 6251, Charts & Tech1 Center of Naval Anal, A’fl’N: Dot Ctr1 NevAirSysCom, A’fl’N: AIR—53 13C1 Nay BuMed, ATTN: 7131 NavHelicopterSsib$qua 2, FPO SF 96601I AFHPL (Fl’) Williams AFB1 AFHRL ITT) Lowry AFB1 AFHRL (AS) W RAPS, OH2 A FHRL (00 (Z) $,rso ks AFB1 AFHPL (DOJN) Lackland AFB1 HOUSAF )INYSD)1 HOUSAF (DPXXA )1 AFVT G (P01 Randolph AFE3 AMRL (HE) W PAFB , OH2 AF Inst of Tech , WPAFB , OH, ATTN: ENE/SL1 ATC (XPTD) Randolph AFB1 USAF A.roMed Lib, Brooks AFB (SUL—4). AT1’N: DOC SEC1 AFOSP (NL). Arlington1 AF log Cmd, McClellan AFB, ATTN: ALC/OPCR B1 Air Force Academy, CO. ATIN: Dept of Sd Scn5 NavPers & 0ev Cv . San Diego2 Navy Med Neuropsychiatric Rich Unit, Sen Diego1 Mae Electronic Lab, Sari Diego. ATTN: Ret Lab1 Mae TrngCan. Sen Diego, ATTN: Code 9000— Lib1 NevPoetGraSch , Monterey, ATTN : Ct~ 55AaI NavPostGraSch, Monterey, ATTN: Code 2124I NavTrngEquipCtr. Orlando, ATTN: Tech Lib1 US Dept of Labor, DC, ATT’N: Manpower Admin1 US Dept of Justice, DC, ATI’N: Drug Enforce Admin1 Nat Bur of St,ondards, DC, ATTN: Coniputer Info SectionI Nat Clearing House for MH—Info , Rockvills1 Denver Federal Ctr, Lak.wood. ATTN: BLM

12 Defense Documentation Center4 Dir Psych, Army Hq, Russell Ofcs. Canberra1 Scientific Mew . PAil Sd. Army H~ , ~‘4ussell Ofes, Canberra1 PAil arid Air Attache, Austr ian Emb.sey1 Centre de Recherche Dee Facteuri, Hurnaine tie a Defense

National., Baiseehs2 Canadian Joint Staff WashingtonI C/Air Staff, Royal Canadian AF , ATIN: Pare Std Anal Br3 Chief, Cwadian Oaf Rich Staff. ATI’N: C/CRDSIW)4 Sr$tials Def Staff , Brutish Embaaey, Waalsinroes

36

J~iri] - DTIC

Documents