|
Items in cart [0] |
Questions? Call 888-624-8373 |
| Copyright © 2009. 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
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior
APPLICATION TO MILITARY SIMULATIONS
Richard W. Pew and Anne S. Mavor, editors
Panel on Modeling Human Behavior and Command Decision Making: Representations for Military Simulations
Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education
National Research Council
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C. 1998
OCR for page R2
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
2101 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, D.C. 20418
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 committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
This study was supported by Technical Support Services Contract DACW61-96-D-0001 between the National Academy of Sciences and the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office of the U.S. Department of Defense. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the organizations or agencies that provided support for this project.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Modeling human and organizational behavior : application to military simulations / Richard W. Pew and Anne S. Mavor, editors.
p. cm.
"Panel on Modeling Human Behavior and Command Decision Making: Representations for Military Simulations, Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education, National Research Council."
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-309-06096-6
1. Psychology, Military. 2. Human behavior—Simulation methods. 3. Decision-making. 4. Command of troops. I. Pew, Richard W. II. Mavor, Anne S. III. National Research Council (U.S.). Panel on Modeling Human Behavior and Command Decision Making: Representations for Military Simulations.
U22.3 .M58 1998
355'.001'9—ddc21
98-19705
Additional copies of this report are available from:
National Academy Press
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418 Call 800-624-6242 or 202-334-3313 (in the Washington Metropolitan Area). This report is also available online at http://www.nap.edu
Printed in the United States of America
Copyright 1998 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
OCR for page R3
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
PANEL ON MODELING HUMAN BEHAVIOR AND COMMAND DECISION MAKING: REPRESENTATIONS FOR MILITARY SIMULATIONS
RICHARD W. PEW (Chair),
BBN Technologies, GTE Internetworking, Cambridge, MA
JEROME BUSEMEYER,
Psychology Department, Indiana University
KATHLEEN M. CARLEY,
Department of Social and Decision Sciences, Carnegie Mellon University
TERRY CONNOLLY,
Department of Management and Policy and College of Business and Public Administration, University of Arizona, Tucson
JOHN R. CORSON,
JRC Research and Analysis, L.L.C., Williamsburg, VA
KENNETH H. FUNK, II,
Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering, Oregon State University, Corvallis
BONNIE E. JOHN,
Human-Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University
RICHARD M. SHIFFRIN,
Psychology Department, Indiana University, Bloomington
GREG L. ZACHARIAS,
Charles River Analytics, Cambridge, MA
ANNE S. MAVOR, Study Director
JERRY S. KIDD, Senior Adviser
SUSAN R. McCUTCHEN, Senior Project Assistant
OCR for page R4
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
COMMITTEE ON HUMAN FACTORS
WILLIAM C. HOWELL (Chair),
Arizona State University, Tempe
TERRY CONNOLLY,
Department of Management and Policy and College of Business and Public Administration, University of Arizona, Tucson
COLIN G. DRURY,
Industrial Engineering Department, University of Buffalo, New York
MARTHA GRABOWSKI,
Rensselaer Polytechnic and LeMoyne College, New York
DANIEL R. ILGEN,
Department of Psychology and Department of Management, Michigan State University
RICHARD J. JAGACINSKI,
Department of Psychology, Ohio State University, Columbus
LAWRENCE R. JAMES,
Department of Management, University of Tennessee
BONNIE E. JOHN,
Human-Computer Interaction Institute, Carnegie Mellon University
TOM B. LEAMON,
Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. and Liberty Mutual Research Center for Safety and Health, Hopkinton, MA
DAVID C. NAGEL,
AT&T Laboratories, Basking Ridge, NJ
KARLENE ROBERTS,
Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley
LAWRENCE W. STARK,
School of Optometry, University of California, Berkeley
KIM J. VICENTE,
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Toronto, Canada
EARL L. WIENER,
Department of Management Science, University of Miami
GREG L. ZACHARIAS,
Charles River Analytics, Cambridge, MA
ANNE S. MAVOR, Director
JERRY S. KIDD, Senior Adviser
SUSAN R. McCUTCHEN, Senior Project Assistant
OCR for page R5
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
Contents
PREFACE
ix
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
1
A Framework for the Development of Models of Human Behavior
2
Recommendations for Infrastructure and Information Exchange
7
A Final Thought
8
1
INTRODUCTION
9
Study Approach and Scope
10
What Is Human Behavior Representation?
10
The Role of Psychological and Organizational Science
14
The Challenge
16
Setting Expectations in the User Community
17
Organization of the Report
18
2
HUMAN BEHAVIOR REPRESENTATION: MILITARY REQUIREMENTS AND CURRENT MODELS
19
Military/Modeling Requirements
19
Example Vignette: A Tank Platoon in the Hasty Defense
20
Military Simulations: Types and Use
33
Current Military Models of Human Behavior and Their Limitations
38
Annex: Current Military Models and Simulations
45
OCR for page R6
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
3
INTEGRATIVE ARCHITECTURES FOR MODELING THE INDIVIDUAL COMBATANT
51
General Introduction to Integrative Architectures
52
Review of Integrative Architectures
54
Comparison of Architectures
96
Hybrid Architectures: A Possible Research Path
108
Conclusions and Goals
110
4
ATTENTION AND MULTITASKING
112
Introduction
112
Attention
116
Multitasking
119
Integrating Conceptual Frameworks
125
Conclusions and Goals
127
5
MEMORY AND LEARNING
129
Basic Structures
129
Modeling of the Different Types of Memory
131
Modeling of Human Learning
135
Conclusions and Goals
148
6
HUMAN DECISION MAKING
150
Synopsis of Utility Theory
152
Injecting Variability and Adaptability into Decision Models
156
Incorporating Individual Differences and Moderating States
162
Incorporating Judgmental Errors into Decision Models
163
Conclusions and Goals
169
7
SITUATION AWARENESS
172
Situation Awareness and Its Role in Combat Decision Making
173
Models of Situation Awareness
176
Enabling Technologies for Implementation of Situation Awareness Models
182
Relationships to Other Models
192
Conclusions and Goals
199
8
PLANNING
203
Planning and Its Role in Tactical Decision Making
203
Models for Planning in Military Human Behavior Representations
215
Planning Models in the Artificial Intelligence and Behavioral Science Communities
234
Conclusions and Goals
240
OCR for page R7
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
9
BEHAVIOR MODERATORS
242
Introduction
242
External Moderators of Human Behavior
245
Internal Moderators of Human Behavior
250
Modeling Behavior Moderators
259
Conclusions and Goals
268
10
MODELING OF BEHAVIOR AT THE UNIT LEVEL
269
Introduction
269
Why Model the Organizational Unit?
273
Prior Work in Unit-Level Modeling
274
Application Areas for Organizational Unit-Level Models
275
Overarching Issues
289
Organizational Unit-Level Modeling Languages and Frameworks
293
Conclusions and Goals
296
11
INFORMATION WARFARE: A STRUCTURAL PERSPECTIVE
301
Introduction
301
Models of Information Diffusion
304
Models of Belief Formation
310
Role of Communications Technology
315
Conclusions and Goals
316
12
METHODOLOGICAL ISSUES AND APPROACHES
320
The Need for Situation-Specific Modeling
319
A Methodology for Developing Human Behavior Representations
320
13
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
329
A Framework for the Development of Models of Human Behavior
330
Recommendations for Infrastructure and Information Exchange
340
A Final Thought
341
REFERENCES
343
APPENDIX: BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES
391
INDEX
397
OCR for page R8
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
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 in 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 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. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
OCR for page R9
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
Preface
This report is the work of the Panel on Modeling Human Behavior and Command Decision Making: Representations for Military Simulations. The panel was established by the National Research Council (NRC) in 1996 in response to a request from the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office of the U.S. Department of Defense. The charge to the panel was to review the state of the art in human behavior representation as applied to military simulations, with emphasis on the challenging areas of cognitive, team, and organizational behavior. The panel formed to meet these goals included experts in individual behavior, organizational behavior, decision making, human factors, computational modeling, and military simulations.
The project extended over an 18-month period. At the end of the first phase, in February 1997, the panel published an interim report (Pew and Mavor, 1997) that argued for the need for models of human behavior, summarized a methodology for ensuring the development of useful models, and described selected psychological process models that have the potential to improve the realism with which human-influenced action is represented. In the second phase of the project, the panel conducted an in-depth analysis of the theoretical and applied research in human behavior modeling at the individual, unit, and command levels. The result of that analysis is presented in this final report.
This report is intended not only for policy makers in the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office and the military services, but also for the broader behavioral science community in the military, other government agencies, industry, and universities, whose modeling efforts can contribute to the development of more realistic and thus more useful military simulations.
OCR for page R10
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
Many individuals have made a significant contribution to the panel's thinking and to various sections of the report by serving as presenters, consultants, and reviewers. Although all of these individuals provided valuable information, a few played a more direct role in developing this manuscript and deserve special mention. First, we extend our gratitude to Eva Hudlicka of Psychometrix Associates for her substantial contribution to the chapters on situation awareness and behavior moderators; in the latter chapter she provided draft material on modeling the effects of emotion on the cognitive activities of command decision makers. Next, we extend our gratitude to John Anderson of Carnegie Mellon University for his contributions to the discussion of ACT-R, to Stephen Grossberg of Boston University for his contribution on adaptive resonance theory, and to Stephen Deutsch of BBN Technologies, GTE Internetworking, for his work on OMAR. Finally, we offer a special thank you to David Kieras of the University of Michigan for his important insights as a member of the panel through its first phase and as a contributor of key information on EPIC for this volume.
Other individuals who provided important information and help include: Laurel Allender, Army Research Laboratory, Human Research and Engineering Directorate; Susan Archer, Micro Analysis and Design; Floyd Glenn, CHI Systems; Paul Lehner, MITRE Corporation; John Laird, University of Michigan; Ron Laughery, Micro Analysis and Design; John Lockett, Army Research Laboratory, Human Research and Engineering Directorate; Commander Dennis McBride, Office of Naval Research; James L. McClelland, Center for the Neural Basis of Cognition; H. Kent Pickett, TRADOC Analysis Center; Douglas Reece, Science Applications International Corporation; Gerard Rinkus, Charles River Analytics; Jay Shively, NASA Ames; Barry Smith, NASA Ames; Magnus Snorrason, Charles River Analytics; and Dave Touretzky, Carnegie Mellon University.
To our sponsors, the Defense Modeling and Simulation Office, we are most grateful for their interest in the topic of this report and their many useful contributions to the panel's work. We particularly thank Judith Dahmann, James Heusmann, Ruth Willis, and Major Steve Zeswitz, USMC. We also extend our thanks to Lieutenant Colonel Peter Polk for his support and encouragement during the projects first phase.
In the course of preparing this report, each member of the panel took an active role in drafting chapters, leading discussions, and reading and commenting on successive drafts. Jerome Busemeyer provided material on learning and decision making; Kathleen Carley drafted chapters on command and control at the unit level and on information warfare; Terry Connolly provided sections on decision making; John Corson provided expertise and drafted material on military needs and operations, Kenneth Funk took the major responsibility for coordinating and drafting material on integrative architectures and on multitasking; Bonnie John contributed significantly to the chapter on integrative architectures; Richard Shiffrin drafted sections on attention and memory; and Greg Zacharias drafted
OCR for page R11
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
material on situation awareness and planning. We are deeply indebted to the panel members for their broad scholarship, their insights, and their cooperative spirit. Truly, our report is the product of an intellectual team effort.
This report has been reviewed by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the NRC's Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the authors and the NRC in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The content of the review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process.
We thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report: Ruzena Bajcsy, Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania; Kevin Corker, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, California; Scott Gronlund, Department of Psychology, University of Oklahoma; William Howell, American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.; John F. Kihlstrom, Department of Psychology, University of California at Berkeley; R. Duncan Luce, Institute for Mathematical Behavioral Science, University of California at Irvine; Krishna Pattipati, Department of Electrical and Systems Engineering, University of Connecticut; Paul S. Rosenbloom, Department of Computer Science, University of Southern California; Anne Treisman, Department of Psychology, Princeton University; and Wayne Zachary, CHI Systems, Lower Gwynedd, Pennsylvania.
Although the individuals listed above provided many constructive comments and suggestions, responsibility for the final content of this report rests solely with the authoring panel and the NRC.
Staff of the National Research Council made important contributions to our work in many ways. We extend particular thanks to Susan McCutchen, the panel's senior project assistant, who was indispensable in organizing meetings, arranging travel, compiling agenda materials, coordinating the sharing of information among panel members, and managing the preparation of this report. We are also indebted to Jerry Kidd, who provided help whenever it was needed and who made significant contributions to the chapter on the behavior moderators. Finally, we thank Rona Briere, whose editing greatly improved the report.
Richard W. Pew, Chair
Anne S. Mavor, Study Director
Panel on Modeling Human Behavior and Command
Decision Making: Representations for Military Simulations
OCR for page R12
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
This page in the original is blank.
OCR for page R13
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior
OCR for page R14
Modeling Human and Organizational Behavior: Application to Military Simulations
This page in the original is blank.
`
