Do operators take advantage of a secondary, global-perspective display when performing a simulated laparoscopic search task?

M. Sublette, C. M. Carswell, W. Seidelman, R. Grant, Q. Han, M. Field, C. H. Lio, G. Lee, W. B. Seales, D. Clarke

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Abstract

Multi-display surgical environments have the potential to increase performance and efficiency while decreasing errors and workload. However as more and more information is required for complex task execution and decision making, we must continually assess how the information is presented and whether we are helping or hindering surgeons by providing more content. Most laparoscopic surgeries are performed utilizing a single, two-dimensional (2-D) display. In the current experiment, we compared display usage, subjective workload, and workload measured via eye-tracking data to determine the effectiveness of an additional three-dimensional (3-D) display for a simulated surgical search task. We found that while participants did use the additional display in less demanding conditions (e.g., with fewer search targets), they did not use the supplemental display in conditions with greater demands, and they did not receive a substantial benefit from the presence of the supplemental display in either condition. Both increased saccades per target and increased perceived workload via the NASA-TLX provided support that more workload was experienced in conditions with more targets. And while participants did perceive decreased workload for more targets when the 3-D display was available, eye-tracking metrics were not consistent with participants' subjective workload estimates. Since subjective workload ratings may be influenced by expectancies for benefits for the additional display, future research should attempt to understand this workload dissociation as well as breakdowns in the usage of supplemental displays as a function of task difficulty.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationProceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 55th Annual Meeting, HFES 2011
Pages1626-1630
Number of pages5
DOIs
StatePublished - 2011
Externally publishedYes
Event55th Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, HFES 2011 - Las Vegas, NV, United States
Duration: Sep 19 2011Sep 23 2011

Other

Other55th Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, HFES 2011
CountryUnited States
CityLas Vegas, NV
Period9/19/119/23/11

Fingerprint

workload
Display devices
Eye movements
surgery
Surgery
NASA
rating
Decision making
decision making
efficiency
experiment
performance

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Human Factors and Ergonomics

Cite this

Sublette, M., Carswell, C. M., Seidelman, W., Grant, R., Han, Q., Field, M., ... Clarke, D. (2011). Do operators take advantage of a secondary, global-perspective display when performing a simulated laparoscopic search task? In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 55th Annual Meeting, HFES 2011 (pp. 1626-1630) https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181311551339

Do operators take advantage of a secondary, global-perspective display when performing a simulated laparoscopic search task? / Sublette, M.; Carswell, C. M.; Seidelman, W.; Grant, R.; Han, Q.; Field, M.; Lio, C. H.; Lee, G.; Seales, W. B.; Clarke, D.

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 55th Annual Meeting, HFES 2011. 2011. p. 1626-1630.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contribution

Sublette, M, Carswell, CM, Seidelman, W, Grant, R, Han, Q, Field, M, Lio, CH, Lee, G, Seales, WB & Clarke, D 2011, Do operators take advantage of a secondary, global-perspective display when performing a simulated laparoscopic search task? in Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 55th Annual Meeting, HFES 2011. pp. 1626-1630, 55th Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, HFES 2011, Las Vegas, NV, United States, 9/19/11. https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181311551339
Sublette M, Carswell CM, Seidelman W, Grant R, Han Q, Field M et al. Do operators take advantage of a secondary, global-perspective display when performing a simulated laparoscopic search task? In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 55th Annual Meeting, HFES 2011. 2011. p. 1626-1630 https://doi.org/10.1177/1071181311551339
Sublette, M. ; Carswell, C. M. ; Seidelman, W. ; Grant, R. ; Han, Q. ; Field, M. ; Lio, C. H. ; Lee, G. ; Seales, W. B. ; Clarke, D. / Do operators take advantage of a secondary, global-perspective display when performing a simulated laparoscopic search task?. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 55th Annual Meeting, HFES 2011. 2011. pp. 1626-1630
@inproceedings{f4013fb2b934481c8b0a84daae5d21e7,
title = "Do operators take advantage of a secondary, global-perspective display when performing a simulated laparoscopic search task?",
abstract = "Multi-display surgical environments have the potential to increase performance and efficiency while decreasing errors and workload. However as more and more information is required for complex task execution and decision making, we must continually assess how the information is presented and whether we are helping or hindering surgeons by providing more content. Most laparoscopic surgeries are performed utilizing a single, two-dimensional (2-D) display. In the current experiment, we compared display usage, subjective workload, and workload measured via eye-tracking data to determine the effectiveness of an additional three-dimensional (3-D) display for a simulated surgical search task. We found that while participants did use the additional display in less demanding conditions (e.g., with fewer search targets), they did not use the supplemental display in conditions with greater demands, and they did not receive a substantial benefit from the presence of the supplemental display in either condition. Both increased saccades per target and increased perceived workload via the NASA-TLX provided support that more workload was experienced in conditions with more targets. And while participants did perceive decreased workload for more targets when the 3-D display was available, eye-tracking metrics were not consistent with participants' subjective workload estimates. Since subjective workload ratings may be influenced by expectancies for benefits for the additional display, future research should attempt to understand this workload dissociation as well as breakdowns in the usage of supplemental displays as a function of task difficulty.",
author = "M. Sublette and Carswell, {C. M.} and W. Seidelman and R. Grant and Q. Han and M. Field and Lio, {C. H.} and G. Lee and Seales, {W. B.} and D. Clarke",
year = "2011",
doi = "10.1177/1071181311551339",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9780945289395",
pages = "1626--1630",
booktitle = "Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 55th Annual Meeting, HFES 2011",

}

TY - GEN

T1 - Do operators take advantage of a secondary, global-perspective display when performing a simulated laparoscopic search task?

AU - Sublette, M.

AU - Carswell, C. M.

AU - Seidelman, W.

AU - Grant, R.

AU - Han, Q.

AU - Field, M.

AU - Lio, C. H.

AU - Lee, G.

AU - Seales, W. B.

AU - Clarke, D.

PY - 2011

Y1 - 2011

N2 - Multi-display surgical environments have the potential to increase performance and efficiency while decreasing errors and workload. However as more and more information is required for complex task execution and decision making, we must continually assess how the information is presented and whether we are helping or hindering surgeons by providing more content. Most laparoscopic surgeries are performed utilizing a single, two-dimensional (2-D) display. In the current experiment, we compared display usage, subjective workload, and workload measured via eye-tracking data to determine the effectiveness of an additional three-dimensional (3-D) display for a simulated surgical search task. We found that while participants did use the additional display in less demanding conditions (e.g., with fewer search targets), they did not use the supplemental display in conditions with greater demands, and they did not receive a substantial benefit from the presence of the supplemental display in either condition. Both increased saccades per target and increased perceived workload via the NASA-TLX provided support that more workload was experienced in conditions with more targets. And while participants did perceive decreased workload for more targets when the 3-D display was available, eye-tracking metrics were not consistent with participants' subjective workload estimates. Since subjective workload ratings may be influenced by expectancies for benefits for the additional display, future research should attempt to understand this workload dissociation as well as breakdowns in the usage of supplemental displays as a function of task difficulty.

AB - Multi-display surgical environments have the potential to increase performance and efficiency while decreasing errors and workload. However as more and more information is required for complex task execution and decision making, we must continually assess how the information is presented and whether we are helping or hindering surgeons by providing more content. Most laparoscopic surgeries are performed utilizing a single, two-dimensional (2-D) display. In the current experiment, we compared display usage, subjective workload, and workload measured via eye-tracking data to determine the effectiveness of an additional three-dimensional (3-D) display for a simulated surgical search task. We found that while participants did use the additional display in less demanding conditions (e.g., with fewer search targets), they did not use the supplemental display in conditions with greater demands, and they did not receive a substantial benefit from the presence of the supplemental display in either condition. Both increased saccades per target and increased perceived workload via the NASA-TLX provided support that more workload was experienced in conditions with more targets. And while participants did perceive decreased workload for more targets when the 3-D display was available, eye-tracking metrics were not consistent with participants' subjective workload estimates. Since subjective workload ratings may be influenced by expectancies for benefits for the additional display, future research should attempt to understand this workload dissociation as well as breakdowns in the usage of supplemental displays as a function of task difficulty.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=81855177035&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=81855177035&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1071181311551339

DO - 10.1177/1071181311551339

M3 - Conference contribution

AN - SCOPUS:81855177035

SN - 9780945289395

SP - 1626

EP - 1630

BT - Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 55th Annual Meeting, HFES 2011

ER -