Click for next page ( 2

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 1
PART I Overview PART ~ CONSISTS OF THREE CHAFERS. Chapter 1 sets the stage for the report. It describes the committee's task, provides background on the Army's interest in enhancement techniques, characterizes specific techniques examined by the committee, and identifies the main issues in evaluating the relation between techniques and human performance. Chapter 2 presents the committee's findings and conclusions. We draw general conclusions about the process of consideration given to any technique and state specific findings and conclusions for each of the areas of human performance examined. Chapter 3 presents the committee's philosophy of evaluation as it pertains to enhancement techniques. Some of the issues involved concern the conduct of basic research; others concern the conduct of field tests. With respect to basic research, issues include the plausibility of inferences about novel concepts, causation, alternative explanations of causal relations, and the generalizability of causal relations. With respect to field tests, a number of questions are of interest: Does the enhancement program meet genuine Army needs? Is the resulting program implement- able, given program design and resources? Do unintended side effects limit utility? Is the program more cost-effective than its alternatives? These questions underscore the reality that evaluation research is largely a pragmatic activity influenced by the organizational context in which it occurs.

OCR for page 1