Objective

This study investigated how the visualization of an ecological interface affects its subjective and objective usefulness. Therefore, we compared a simple 2D visualization against a contact-analog 3D visualization.

Background

Recently, head-up displays (HUDs) have become contact-analog and visualizations have been enabled to be merged with the real environment. In this regard, ecological interface design visualizing boundaries of acceptable performance might be a perfect match. Because the real-world environment already provides such boundaries (e.g., lane markings), the interface might directly use them. However, visual illusions and undesired interference with the environment might influence the overall usability.

Method

To allow for a comparison, 49 participants tested the same ecological interface in two configurations, contact-analog (3D) and two dimensional (2D). Both visualizations were shown in the car’s head-up display (HUD).

Results

The driving simulator experiment reveals that 3D was rated as more demanding and more disturbing, but also more innovative and appealing. However, regarding driving performance, the 3D representation decreased the accuracy of speed control by 6% while significantly increasing lane stability by 20%.

Conclusion

We conclude that, if we want environmental boundaries guiding our behavior, the indicator for the behavior should be visualized contact-analog. If we desire artificial boundaries (e.g., speed limits) to guide behavior, the behavioral indicator should be visualized in 2D. This is less prone to optical illusions and allows for a more precise control of behavior.

Application

These findings provide guidance to human factors engineers, how contact-analog visualizations might be used optimally.

中文翻译：

---

生态界面设计和平视显示器：接触模拟可视化权衡

客观的

本研究调查了生态界面的可视化如何影响其主观和客观有用性。因此，我们将简单的 2D 可视化与接触模拟 3D 可视化进行了比较。

背景

最近，平视显示器 (HUD) 已成为接触模拟，并且可视化已能够与真实环境融合。在这方面，可视化可接受性能边界的生态界面设计可能是一个完美的匹配。因为现实环境已经提供了这样的边界（例如，车道标记），所以界面可能会直接使用它们。但是，视觉错觉和对环境的不良干扰可能会影响整体可用性。

方法

为了进行比较，49 名参与者在接触模拟 (3D) 和二维 (2D) 两种配置中测试了相同的生态界面。两种可视化效果都显示在汽车的平视显示器 (HUD) 中。

结果

驾驶模拟器实验表明，3D 被评为要求更高、更令人不安，但也更具创新性和吸引力。然而，就驾驶性能而言，3D 表示将速度控制的准确性降低了 6%，同时将车道稳定性显着提高了 20%。

结论

我们得出结论，如果我们希望环境边界指导我们的行为，则行为的指标应该可视化为接触模拟。如果我们希望人工边界（例如，速度限制）来指导行为，则应该以二维方式显示行为指标。这不太容易产生视觉错觉，并且可以更精确地控制行为。

应用

这些发现为人为因素工程师提供了指导，指导他们如何最佳地使用接触模拟可视化。