Suchergebnisse

"This interdisciplinary edited collection features historians, anthropologists, artists, and activists who explore a transpacific understanding of the legacies of the testing and use of nuclear weapons. Instead of limiting the focus of the nuclear humanities to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, these essays take readers from the New Mexican desert, to the islands of the Pacific Ocean, to small fishing villages on the island of Shikoku in Japan. They bring together different times and places as well as art historical analysis and academic essays. Focusing on themes of resistance, this collection illustrates the varied methods artists and activists can use to combat nuclear regimes through their aesthetic and political work. By putting activists and artists together, it demonstrates the overlaps and linkages between them as well as the different ways political and artistic expression can respond to nuclear threats and effect change. Through the personal testimonies of hibakushas, lawsuits filed to demand compensation for the medical treatment of affected fisherman, community education programs that raise historical awareness, and artistic projects that provide social commentary, this volume illustrates that nuclear resistance can come in many forms"--

In Experiment 1, a response-sensitive instructional strategy was compared to three traditional, linear, instructional strategies for use in an embedded training program designed for manual data entry operators in the Army Tactical Operations System command and control system. Results showed that using a response-sensitive strategy can reduce training time without reducing inputting accuracy in a post-training test given in an operational setting. Experiment 2 examined the relative efficiency of [our different manual data entry methods: typing; typing with an error corrector; selecting from menus; and typing with autocompletion and an English option. Results show that selecting from menus is the most accurate inputting method. No differences were found in entry times among the methods, although participants may not have had sufficient practice for such differences to materialize. Results also showed little agreement between preference and performance for the methods.