Representing Human Behavior in Military Simulations

Interim Report

Richard W. Pew and Anne S. Mavor, editors

Panel on Modeling Human Behavior and Command Decision Making: Representations for Military Simulations

Committee on Human Factors

Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education

National Research Council

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.
1997



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 R1
--> Representing Human Behavior in Military Simulations Interim Report Richard W. Pew and Anne S. Mavor, editors Panel on Modeling Human Behavior and Command Decision Making: Representations for Military Simulations Committee on Human Factors Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C.1997

OCR for page R1
--> NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the panel responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance. This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress of 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is interim president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and interim vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council. This work is sponsored by the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office, U.S. Department of Defense, and funded under contract DACW61-96-D-0001. The views, opinions, and findings contained in this report are those of the author(s) and should not be construed as an official Department of Defense position, policy, or decision, unless so designated by other official documentation. Additional copies of this report are available from: National Academy Press,2101 Constitution Avenue, Box 285, Washington, DC 20418 800-624-6242 or 202-334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area). http://www.nap.edu Copyright 1997 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
--> PANEL ON MODELING HUMAN BEHAVIOR AND COMMAND DECISION MAKING: REPRESENTATIONS FOR MILITARY SIMULATIONS RICHARD W. PEW (Chair), BBN Systems and Technologies, Cambridge, MA JEROME R. BUSEMEYER, Department of Psychology, Purdue University KATHLEEN CARLEY, Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University TERRY CONNOLLY, Department of Management and Policy, College of Business and Public Administration, University of Arizona, Tucson JOHN R. CORSON, Integrated Visual Learning, Williamsburg, VA KENNETH H. FUNK II, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis DAVID E. KIERAS, Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor RICHARD M. SHIFFRIN, Psychology Department, Indiana University, Bloomington GREG L. ZACHARIAS, Charles River Analytics, Cambridge, MA ANNE S. MAVOR, Study Director JERRY KIDD, Senior Adviser SUSAN McCUTCHEN, Senior Project Assistant

OCR for page R1
--> COMMITTEE ON HUMAN FACTORS WILLIAM B. ROUSE (Chair), Enterprise Support Systems, Norcross, GA TERRY CONNOLLY, Department of Management and Policy, College of Business and Public Administration, University of Arizona, Tucson WILLIAM C. HOWELL, American Psychological Association Science Directorate, Washington, DC DAVID C. NAGEL, AT&T Laboratories, Basking Ridge, NJ BENJAMIN SCHNEIDER, Department of Psychology, University of Maryland LAWRENCE W. STARK, School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley EARL L. WIENER, Department of Management Science, University of Miami GREG L. ZACHARIAS, Charles River Analytics, Cambridge, MA ANNE MAVOR, Director JERRY KIDD, Senior Adviser SUSAN McCUTCHEN, Senior Project Assistant

OCR for page R1
--> Acknowledgments This report is the collective product of the entire panel, and we would like to thank the members for their active contribution in drafting sections of chapters, leading discussions, and/or reading and commenting on successive drafts. Many individuals have made contributions to the panel's thinking and to various sections of this interim report by serving as presenters, advisers, and liaisons to useful sources of information. First, we would like to thank our sponsors, Judith Dahmann, James Heusmann, and Peter Polk of the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office, for their interest in the topic and their guidance to the panel. In addition, we would like to extend our appreciation to John Laird (University of Michigan), Paul Lehner (MITRE Corporation), H. Kent Pickett (TRADOC Analysis Center, Leavenworth, KS), Douglas Reece (University of Central Florida), and Barry Smith (NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA), who provided us with invaluable information concerning current modeling efforts in the military and at NASA. Finally, staff at the National Research Council made important contributions to our work in many ways. We would like to express our appreciation to Susan McCutchen, the panel's senior project assistant, who was indispensable in organizing meetings, arranging travel, compiling agenda materials, managing the exchange of documentation across the panel and with our project sponsors, and manuscript preparation. We are also indebted to Christine McShane, who edited and significantly improved the report, and to Jerry Kidd, who generously shared his wealth of knowledge and experience. RICHARD W. PEW, CHAIR ANNE S. MAVOR, STUDY DIRECTOR

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
--> Contents     Executive Summary   1 1   Introduction   5     What Is Human Behavior Representation?   6     Setting Expectations in the User Community   9 2   Modeling Needs for Human Behavior Representation   10     What Are the Modeling Needs?   10     How Process Models of the Individual Support These Needs   12     How Process Models of the Unit Support These Needs   14     Need to Represent Behavioral Moderators   15     Need to Represent Learning   15     Need to Represent Variability in Decision Making   16     Needs for Team Behavior Representation   18     Need for Large-Unit Behavior Representation   19 3   A Methodology for Creating Human Behavior Representations   22     The Role of Psychology   22     The Role of Sociology and Organizational Science   23     The Necessity of Situation-Specific Modeling   24     A Methodology for Developing Human Behavior Representations   25

OCR for page R1
--> 4   Promising Developments in Human Behavior Research   32     Learning and Memory   32     Attention and Performance   35     Decision Making   36     Situation Awareness   40     Organizational Models   42     References   44

OCR for page R1
Representing Human Behavior in Military Simulations

OCR for page R1
This page in the original is blank.