Effects of magnification methods and magnifier shapes on visual inspection.
Effects of magnification methods and magnifier shapes on visual inspection.
复制标题
放大方法和放大镜形状对目视检查的影响。
DOI：
10.1016/j.apergo.2008.11.005
复制
发表时间：
2009
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
A. Chan
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
F. C. Lee;A. Chan
本研究研究了新型微分线性和微分非线性放大方法的有效性，以及放大器形状和放大功率对视觉搜索性能的影响。通过不同的放大倍率，较外围的物体的缩放水平高于固定附近的物体。假设：1）由于注视附近的缩放刺激无效，差分放大方法将增强放大效果，从而提高检查性能；2）由于椭圆形透镜形状类似于人类视野的形状，对于相同的放大视野面积，椭圆形放大镜比圆形放大镜更有效。在本研究中，使用了 NASA 任务负荷指数范式对速度和准确性进行客观性能测量以及主观工作负荷评估。结果表明，与 3 倍放大倍数相比，4 倍放大倍数增加了总体检查时间，这表明放大倍数和视野大小之间可能发生了权衡。这两个假设均未得到证实；然而，出现了一些需要进一步调查的问题。对相关问题的讨论包括i）受试者对新的差分放大方法的不熟悉，ii）由于刺激缩放导致的图像重复、不连续和失真而引起的感知不适，iii）注视点的移动，以及iv）中央凹和周边放大物体之间的注意力竞争。这项研究促使作者在未来的研究中考虑微分线性和非线性放大方法的训练计划。通过对镜头和放大图像的性质的正确指导，受试者使用新颖的差分放大方法的表现可能会得到改善。
This study investigated the effectiveness of the novel differential linear and differential nonlinear magnification methods, and the effects of magnifier shape and magnification power on visual search performance. With the differential magnification, objects that were more peripheral were scaled at a level higher than those in the vicinity of fixation. It was hypothesized that 1) owing to the ineffectiveness of scaling stimulus in the vicinity of fixation, the differential magnification methods would enhance magnification effectiveness and thereby improve inspection performance, and 2) because an elliptical lens shape resembles the shape of human visual field, for the same area of magnified view, an elliptical magnifier would be more effective than the circular one. In this study, objective performance measures of speed and accuracy and subjective workload evaluation using the NASA Task Load Index paradigm were used. The results showed that 4× magnification increased the overall inspection time as compared with 3× magnification, suggesting that a trade-off might have occurred between magnification and field size. The two hypotheses were not confirmed; however, a number of questions arose which need further investigation. Discussions of the concerned questions were made on i) the unfamiliarity of subjects with the new differential magnification methods, ii) perceptual discomfort due to image duplication, discontinuity, and distortion resulting from stimulus scaling, iii) the movement of fixation points, and iv) the competition for attention between foveal and peripheral magnified objects. This study prompts the authors to consider a training programme on the differential linear and nonlinear magnification methods in future studies. With proper instructions regarding the nature of lens and magnified images, subjects' performance with the novel differential magnification methods may be improved.