来源类型 | Research Reports
|
规范类型 | 报告
|
DOI | https://doi.org/10.7249/RR2250
|
ISBN | 9781977401328
|
来源ID | RR-2250-A
|
| Collective Simulation-Based Training in the U.S. Army: User Interface Fidelity, Costs, and Training Effectiveness |
| Susan G. Straus; Matthew W. Lewis; Kathryn Connor; Rick Eden; Matthew E. Boyer; Timothy Marler; Christopher M. Carson; Geoffrey E. Grimm; Heather Smigowski
|
发表日期 | 2019
|
出版年 | 2019
|
页码 | 172
|
语种 | 英语
|
结论 |
Army collective SBT uses physically simulated military equipment (PSME) or virtual military equipment (VME)- PSME approaches, such as CCTT and AVCATT, attempt to replicate the physical environment, controls, and sensory cues of an actual tank or aircraft. PSME development, use, and maintenance are expensive, and soldiers' access to PSME equipment may be limited.
- VME uses personal computers and other equipment in ways similar to commercial first-person-shooter games. These have less physical realism but are easier and less expensive to operate, maintain, and upgrade and are more accessible to soldiers, allowing for more practice.
While stakeholders value physical fidelity, psychological fidelity may be most important- High physical fidelity does not necessarily produce better training. Psychological fidelity — the degree to which the simulator prompts relevant cognitive, behavioral, and affective responses — is key to effective learning and training transfer.
- Low physical fidelity can be effective if psychological fidelity is high. This is especially the case for collective tasks that involve largely cognitive skills, such as monitoring others' actions and synchronizing activities.
Additional measures are needed to evaluate effectiveness of SBT- Training evaluation has emphasized performance of the simulator and relies on users' reactions rather than on the performance of trainees and objective performance measures. Additionally, research on learning principles in SBT has lagged development of the technology.
- VME is much less expensive than CCTT and AVCATT once utilization is taken into account, however, the Army needs to collect consistent data on system utilization and training effectiveness to produce robust estimates of cost effectiveness.
|
摘要 |
- Revise training policy and strategy to require or encourage use of collective SBT, and begin to transition from PSME to VME.
- Ensure that company leadership has access to comprehensive, high-quality training support packages (TSPs) for SBT, along with institutional training and support in units on use of these TSPs.
- Improve and standardize measures of trainee performance in SBT.
- Improve and expand the collection of utilization data to evaluate effectiveness of SBT at the program level, and support research on the optimal mix of collective training modalities.
- Conduct one or more experiments or demonstration projects to test the relative effectiveness of PSME and VME, along with robust TSPs, for collective training.
- After implementing the previous recommendation, evaluate courses of action for continued use of CCTT, AVCATT, and VME approaches for collective training.
|
主题 | Military Aircraft
; Military Education and Training
; Military Technology
; United States Army
|
URL | https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2250.html
|
来源智库 | RAND Corporation (United States)
|
引用统计 |
|
资源类型 | 智库出版物
|
条目标识符 | http://119.78.100.153/handle/2XGU8XDN/108983
|
推荐引用方式 GB/T 7714 |
Susan G. Straus,Matthew W. Lewis,Kathryn Connor,et al. Collective Simulation-Based Training in the U.S. Army: User Interface Fidelity, Costs, and Training Effectiveness. 2019.
|