• Humanizing technology.

       

       

       

    • Current Research Projects

      $1.2M NSF & NIH Smart & Connected Health Grant - An intelligent Pervasive Augmented reaLity therapy (iPAL) for Opioid Use Disorder and Recovery

      This project will develop intelligent Pervasive Augmented reaLity therapies (iPAL) - a technology-enabled OUD intervention that aims to help OUD sufferers manage their cravings to reduce their risk for relapse or overdose. iPAL integrates complementary psychotherapies (cognitive behavioral therapy and heart rate variability biofeedback) with immersive technologies (augmented and mixed reality) that will offer convenience, discretion in use, in the moment/real-time through personalized strategies

      $1.2M National Science Foundation- Human-Centered Computing Grant -Augmenting Human Cognition with Collaborative Robots AMELIA (AugMEnted Learning InnovAtion)

      Augmenting Human Cognition with Collaborative Robots (AMELIA: AugMEnted Learning InnovAtion): Collaborative robotics is a growing application space in robot technology used in manufacturing, mining, construction, and energy industrial settings. This convergence research project will contribute new knowledge and theory of Human-Computer Interaction and Human-Robot Interaction, by augmenting human cognition for safer and more efficient collaborative robot interaction.

      Bio-Feedback in Virtual Reality for Pain and Anxiety Management - Alternative Strategies in Addressing the Opioid Epidemic

      Collaboration with Greenville Health System & Southeastern Institute of Manufacturing and Technology. The main contribution of this project is the development of alternative treatment in the form of immersive technology for anxiety and pain that we hypothesize will ultimately lead to better health outcomes.

      Virtual Reality for Pain and Anxiety Management in AYA Cancer Patients

      In data reviewed from our first year of clinic, over 50% of all AYA cancer patients expressed a need for counseling services. Anxiety and depression are more commonly experienced by young cancer survivors. While anti-depressants, anti-anxiolytics and pain medications certainly have a role in treating young adults with cancer, risk of side effects and potential for addiction or abuse remain. As a result, a variety of programs and interventions are being explored to treat the pain and anxiety associated with cancer treatments. One such “alternative” treatment for pain and anxiety involves the use of virtual reality (VR). We plan to achieve this goal by RELIEVE (viRtual rEaLity IntErVEntion), a virtual reality cancer care management intervention scheme.

    • Media

      Virtual Reality for Anxiety, Pain, and Depression During Chemotherapy

      Under a longitudinal study assessing the pain and anxiety management of cancer patients led by Dr. Stanley, associate professor and graduate coordinator, and Dr. Elizabeth Cull, a medical oncologist at Greenville Health Systems, Josh has been testing a new form of chemo patient therapy that allows patients to escape the hospital into a virtual world. We follow the effects VR therapy has on pain, anxiety, and depression

      Biofeedback and Virtual Reality for Pain and Anxiety

      Using "artificial emotional intelligence" to deliver pain and anxiety relief via virtual reality.

      Digital Health Applications

      Using "artificial emotional intelligence" to deliver Cognitive Behavioral Therapy to those with addictions.

      Mixed Reality and Collaborative Robotics - 2020

      Using "artificial emotional intelligence" for the future of work with collaborative robots.

      Immersive Technology and Opioid Use Disorder - 2020

      Using immersive technology for addiction and mental health.

    • TEDx Talk

      Transforming Your Mental Health Journey With Immersive Technologies

      Dr. Laura Stanley, professor of engineering, digs into the opioid epidemic and the role of prescribed narcotics in this crisis. She explores the advantages of virtual and mixed reality for anxiety and pain management while discussing the success of the implementation of this technology in treatment plans. Dr. Laura Stanley is a passionate educator and researcher and has a zest for pushing academic boundaries with her technology inspired pursuits. A professor at Montana State University where she studies human-computer interaction, e.g. projects include immersive technologies for pain and anxiety management for children with cancer and mixed reality (e.g., imagine a hologram therapist) coupled with artificial intelligence to aid those with addictions. Inspiring Dr. Stanley is the advancement of minorities in engineering and computer science; believing in the power of STEM to help others. Her research ideas often happen while fly fishing and wandering around Montana’s open spaces. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community

    •  
      Augmenting Human Cognition with Collaborative Robots AMELIA (AugMEnted Learning InnovAtion)

      NSF Cyber-Human Systems:$1.2M Grant (2019-2023)

      The Story of AMELIA (AMELIA: AugMEnted Learning InnovAtion)

      Collaborative robotics is a growing application space in robot technology used in manufacturing, mining, construction, and energy industrial settings. This convergence research project will contribute new knowledge and theory of Human-Computer Interaction and Human-Robot Interaction, by augmenting human cognition for safer and more efficient collaborative robot interaction.  

       

      To meet these goals, the team of researchers plans to:

      (1) develop a novel HRI task/scenario classification scheme in collaborative robotics environments vulnerable to observable systems failures;

      (2) establish fundamental neurophysiological, cognitive, and socio-behavioral capability models (e.g., workload, cognitive load, fatigue/stress, affect, and trust) during these HRI (i.e., the mind motor machine nexus);

      (3) use these models to determine when and how a human’s cognitive, social, behavioral and environmental states require adjustment via technology to enhance HRI for efficient and safe work performance; and finally

      (4) create an innovative and transformative Work 4.0 architecture (AMELIA: AugMEnted Learning InnovAtion) that includes a layer of augmented reality for human and robots to mutually learn and communicate current states.

       

      The team proposes a novel communication scheme using artificial emotional intelligence in which robots and humans collaborate in potentially dangerous situations. The robot will detect the worker’s “cognitive state” using different machine learning techniques, and then take the appropriate action. Ultimately AMELIA seeks to empower the worker to focus on complex, cognitive problem-solving tasks, performed safely and efficiently, while ensuring that it adapts to both the worker's attitudes and cognitive states.

      Database Development, Code, & Non-Identifying Data

      Community Outreach

       

      Collaborative Robotics and Immersive Technology

      • Schedule an online or face-to-face workshop and explore how engineers and computer scientists are developing virtual reality experiences for improving human and robot interactions. Topics will include: technology to aid children deal with pain and anxiety and holograms to help those with addiction https://coe.montana.edu/outreach/immersive_tech.html

      Children's Science Museum of Bozeman Outreach Demo

      Mixed Reality Demo

      PhD student, Ashish Teotia, demonstrates the Mixed Reality Hololens 2.

      Science is Fun with VR and MR

      PhD student, Ashish Teotia, talks about the role math and science play in VR world creations.

    • NSF-AMELIA Technology Demonstrations

      Integration of Physiological Inputs + Co-Robot Control into Mixed Reality using Microsoft's Hololens 2

      Interface between human and collaborative robot - early functioning interface.

      Using Hololens 2 to Control Co-Robot Remotely

      Interface between human and collaborative robot - early functioning interface.

      Using Mixed Reality, Machine Vision, + Voice Commands to Control Co-Robot Part I

      Using Mixed Reality, Machine Vision, + Voice Commands to Control Co-Robot Part II

    •  

      An intelligent Pervasive Augmented reaLity therapy (iPAL) for Opioid Use Disorder and Recovery

      NSF & NIH Smart & Connected Health: $1.2M Grant (2020-2024)

      The Story of iPAL

      Opioid use disorder and addiction are now characterized as a nationwide “opioid epidemic,” with overdoses now the leading cause of injury deaths in the United States. While opioid overdose deaths have increased greatly over the past two decades as compared to other chronic diseases (e.g., heart disease) the development of remote monitoring and management tools and techniques for opioid cravings, recovery, and relapse have not kept pace. This project will develop intelligent Pervasive Augmented reaLity therapies (iPAL) - a technology-enabled OUD intervention that aims to help OUD sufferers manage their cravings to reduce their risk for relapse or overdose. iPAL integrates complementary psychotherapies (cognitive behavioral therapy and heart rate variability biofeedback) with immersive technologies (augmented and mixed reality) that will offer convenience, discretion in use, in the moment/real-time through personalized strategies. This work is poised to revolutionize how individuals learn, discover, create, and heal in the broader context of developing treatment strategies for those with OUD.

      Augmented, Mixed, & Virtual Reality Development, Code, & Non-Identifying Data

      Coming soon...

      Community Outreach - Immersive Technology and Mental Health

      • Schedule an online or face-to-face workshop and explore how engineers and computer scientists are developing virtual reality experiences for improving mental health. Topics will include: technology to aid children deal with pain and anxiety and holograms to help those with addiction https://coe.montana.edu/outreach/immersive_tech.html

    • iPAL Technology Demonstrations

      Volumetric Video Capture

      Our 1st Phase in generating mixed reality content for our patients.

      Early Demo of our iPAL App

      Our 1st Phase in the development of our App and Augmented Reality for Opioid Use Disorder

    • Peer Reviewed Publications

      Kalatzis A., Stanley L., Karthikeyan R., & Mehta R. Mental stress classification during a motor task in older adults using an Artificial Neural Network. 8th international workshop on human activity sensing corpus and applications (HASCA). Proceedings of the 2020 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing and Proceedings of the 2020 ACM International Symposium on Wearable Computers -UbiComp/ISWC ’20, 2020.

       

      Prabhu, V., Stanley, C. Linder, & R. Morgan, “Affective computing in virtual reality environments for pain and anxiety management,” in Proceedings - 2020 IEEE International Conference on Human-Machine Systems, 2020.

       

      Rahman, S., Wittie, M., Stanley, L., & Patterson, S. MicroLambda Packetized Computation for 5G Mobile Edge Computing, USEnix, USENIX Association HotEdge 20 3rd USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Edge Computing, June, 2020

       

      Prabhu, V., Linder, C., Stanley, L. & Morgan, R. Affective Computing in Virtual Reality Environments for Managing Surgical Pain and Anxiety, Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on IEEE Artificial Intelligence and Virtual Reality, December, 2019.

       

      E. H. Cull, A. Saha, L. M. Stanley, V. G. Prabhu, & J. Biro, “Analyzing the Efficacy and Design Considerations of VR Environments to Manage Anxiety & Depression in AYA Cancer Patients,” Blood, vol. 134, no. Supplement_1, pp. 3441–3441, Nov. 2019.

       

      Biro, J., Linder, C., & Stanley, L. Applications of Virtual Environments in Human Factors Research and Practice: Utilizing Virtual Reality and Biofeedback as an Adjunct Treatment in Addressing the Opioid Crisis. Human Factors & Ergonomics Society Annual Conference, abstract and demonstration, Washington, DC., October, 2019.

       

      Hinges, A., Biro, J., & Stanley, L. Analyzing the Mood-Improvement Effects of Exposure to Virtual Reality Dogs, National Conference on Undergraduate Research, Kennesaw, Georgia, April 10-13, 2019.

       

      Deb, S., Carruth, D. Fuad, M., Stanley, L., & Frey D., Comparison of child and adult pedestrian perspectives of external features on autonomous vehicles using a virtual reality experiment, Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing, Volume 964, Springer Nature, 2019.

       

      Clause, K., Shvorin, D., Pirrallo, R., & Stanley, L., Utilizing Virtual Exposure Therapy in Emergent Clinical Care to Reduce Antipsychotic Medication Usage, Applied Ergonomics Conference, New Orleans, March 25-28, 2019.

       

      Hinges, A., Biro, J., & Stanley, L. Analyzing the Mood-Improvement Effects of Exposure to Virtual Reality Dogs, National Conference on Undergraduate Research, Kennesaw, Georgia, April 10-13, 2019.

       

      Rickert, A., Walter, T., Linder, C., & Stanley, L. Examination of Presence in VR Through Haptically Delivered Thermal Stimuli, National Conference on Undergraduate Research, Kennesaw, Georgia, April 10-13, 2019.

       

      .Deb, S., Carruth, D. Fuad, M., Stanley, L., & Frey D., Comparison of child and adult pedestrian perspectives of external features on autonomous vehicles using virtual reality experiment, International Conference on Human Factors and Ergonomics, Washington D.C., July 24-28, 2019.

       

      Prabhu, V. & Stanley, L. Analyzing the Efficacy of VR to Mitigate Acute Pain and Anxiety in Operative Settings, Institute of Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference, Orlando, FL, 2019.

       

      Goyal, A., Pierluigi P., McClendon, J., Stanley, L, & Schmueser, D. Analysis of Text Attributes for Passive Vehicle-to-Pedestrian Communication in an Autonomoous Vehicle using Ramsis Automotive Module, Human-Computer Interaction International, proceedings, Orlando, FL, 2019.

       

      Agnisarman, S., Madathil, K., & Stanley, L., A Survey of Empirical Studies on Persuasive Technologies to Promote Sustainable Living, Sustainable Computing: Informatics and Systems Journal, 2018.

       

      Barry, J., Schiff, S., Biro, J., Ghalayani, M., & Stanley, L., Personas to Improve the Development of Healthcare Focused Virtual Reality Applications, Southeastern Human Factors Applied Research Conference, poster, 2018.

       

      Prabhu, V., Shvorin, D., Stanley, L., & Pirrallo, R. A Comparative Study Between Resident and Attending Physicians in the Emergency Department to Analyze Stress and Burnout, Southeastern Human Factors Applied Research Conference, poster, 2018.

       

      Prabhu, V., Shvorin, D., Stanley, L., & Coldebella, R. Physician Distraction in the Emergency Department, Southeastern Human Factors Applied Research Conference, poster, April 2018.

       

      Biro, J.& Stanley, L., Evaluating the Efficacy of VR for Managing the Pain and Anxiety of AYA Cancer Patients, Southeastern Human Factors Applied Research Conference, poster, April 2018.

       

      Ghalayani, M., Schiff, S. & Stanley, L., The Use of VR for Acute Pain Management in Operative Care Environments, Southeastern Human Factors Applied Research Conference, poster, April 2018.

       

      Mears, L., Niaki, F., Muth, R., & Stanley, L. Additive Manufacturing: Sociology and Psychology as Fundamental Design Elements for Future Advanced Production Systems, David Dornfeld Manufacturing Vision Award and Blue Sky Competition (NSF sponsored), abstract, 2018.

       

      .Stanley, L. Fatigue Monitoring Technologies for Detecting Driver Drowsiness, Human Factors & Ergonomics Society Annual Conference, abstract, Washington, DC., September, 2016. http://pro.sagepub.com/content/60/1/993.abstract

       

      Mueller, J., & Stanley, L. Multivariate Analysis of Driver Responses in Simulator and On-Road, Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference, poster, Anaheim, CA, 2016.

       

      Young, K., & Stanley, L. Teen Driving Attitudinal and Behavioral Differences Across Two States, Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference Proceedings, Anaheim, CA, 2016.

       

      Imtiaz, A., & Stanley, L. On-Road Study Assessing the Effect of Age and Experience on Hazard Perception, Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference, poster, Anaheim, CA, 2016.

       

      Stanley, L & Young, K. Validity Assessment of Virtual Reality through Geo-Specific Scenarios. Applied Ergonomics Conference, poster, March 21-24, 2016.

       

      Manlove, K., Stanley, L., and Peck, A. A quantitative approach to assessing the efficacy of occupant protection programs: A case study from Montana, Accident Analysis and Prevention Journal, Volume 83, October 2015, Pages 214–221.

       

      Stanley, L., Hoyt, T., Scott, A., & Plumb, C. An Experiment in the Integration of a Communications Toolkit into the Mechanical and Industrial Engineering Curriculum, IEEE Transactions in Professional Communication. 2015, pending revisions.

       

      Young, K. & Stanley, L., Human Factors Design of a Low-Cost Adjustable Wheel Locking System for a Child’s Wheelchair, 6th International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics, Las Vegas, USA July 26-30, 2015.

       

      Imtiaz, A., & Stanley, L. Hazard Perception Differences Between Experienced and Less Experienced Drivers, Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference Proceedings, Nashville, TN, 2015.

       

      Mueller, J., Young, K., & Stanley, L. Validating a Driving Simulator: Effect of Increased Mental Effort While Driving on Real Roads and in Simulators. Transportation Research Board 2015 Annual Meeting. Transportation Research Board: Washington, D.C., January 2015.

       

      Mueller, J., Young, K., & Stanley, L. Driver Characteristics: Simulated and On-Road Driver Stopping Behaviors. Transportation Research Board 2015 Annual Meeting. Transportation Research Board: Washington, D.C., January 2015.

       

      Schell, B., Claudio, D., Sobek, D., Stanley, L., & Ward, N. Introducing Flexibility in an Engineering Curriculum Through Student Designed Elective Programs. 2014 ASEE Annual Conference, June 2014.

       

      Page, L. & Stanley, L. Ergonomics Service Learning Project: Implementing an Alternative Educational Method in an Industrial Engineering Undergraduate Ergonomics Course. Journal of Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries 00 (0) 1–13 (2014). 2014. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/hfm.20544/abstract

       

      Mueller, J., Gallagher, C., Martin, T. & Stanley, L. Driving Simulator and Scenario Effects on Driver Response. Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference Proceedings. Montreal, CAN, May 2014. http://www.xcdsystem.com/iie2014/abstract/finalpapers/I184.pdf

       

      Imtiaz, A., Mueller, J. & Stanley, L. Driving Behavior Differences among Early Licensed Teens, Novice Teens, and Experienced Drivers in Simulator and Real World Hazards. Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference Proceedings. Montreal, CAN, May 2014. http://www.xcdsystem.com/iie2014/abstract/finalpapers/I1467.pdf

       

      Imtiaz, A. & Stanley, L. Characterizing Eye Movement Behavior of Teen Drivers while Following a Left Turing Truck at Stop Controlled Intersection. 12th Annual Regional National Occupational Research Agenda Symposium. Salt Lake City, UT. April 2014.

       

      Stanley, L., Manlove K., Peck, A. Evaluating the Effectiveness of Occupant Protection Programs. Conference on Statistical Practice, Tampa, FL February 20-22, 2014.

       

      Mueller, J. & Stanley, L. Emergency Medical Services: A Naturalistic Posture Evaluation While Providing Patient Care during Patient Transport. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Proceedings, San Diego, CA, October 2013. http://pro.sagepub.com/content/57/1/1546.short

       

      Mueller, J. & Stanley, L. Contributors toward Ambulance Use of Lights and Sirens from Patient Records. Open Journal of Safety Science and Technology, Vol 3., No. 3, 2013, pp 63-68, www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?PaperID=37092.

       

      Mueller, J., Hoyt, T. & Stanley, L. Improving Restraint Feasibility through Ambulance Layout Redesign. 7th Annual Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment, Training and Vehicle Design, Bolton Landing, NY, June 17-20, 2013. http://drivingassessment.uiowa.edu/sites/default/files/DA2013/Papers/014_Mueller_0.pdf

       

      Stanley, L. Complexity of Instrumentation in Assessing Virtual vs Real World Hazard Perception Environments. Proceedings 1st Annual International Conference on Industrial & Systems Engineering, Athens, Greece, June 24-27, 2013.

       

      Mueller, J., Stanley, L., Azamian, T. & Mercer, D. Assessing Physiological Response Validity in Simulated and Real Driving Environments. Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference Proceedings. San Juan, PR, May 2013. http://www.xcdsystem.com/iie2014/abstract/finalpapers/I184.pdf

       

      Young, K. & Stanley, L. Driver’s Attitudes and Behaviors Regarding Voice Activated Texting Technology and Distracted Driving. Proceedings of the Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference, Puerto Rico, 2013. http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-3169587921.html

       

      Page, L., Stanley, L., & Sharma, J. Teen drivers’ hazard perception – are we using crash-representative testing scenarios? Proceedings of the Industrial and Systems Engineering Research Conference, Orlando, FL, 2012. http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-2813482121.html

       

      Mueller, J., L. Stanley and Manlove, K. "Multi-Stage Novice Defensive Driver Training Program: Does It Create Overconfidence?," Open Journal of Safety Science and Technology, Vol. 2 No. 4, 2012, pp. 133-139. doi: 10.4236/ojsst.2012.24017. http://www.scirp.org/journal/PaperInformation.aspx?paperID=25536

       

      Ward, N.J., Durkee, S., & Stanley, L. An Objective Evaluation of an Education-Based Distracted and Drowsy Driving Intervention for Rural Teen Drivers. 5th International Conference on Traffic and Transport Psychology. Groningen, The Netherlands, August 29 – 31, 2012.

       

      Antin, J., Lockhart, T., Stanley, L. & Guo, F. Comparing the Impairment Profiles of Older Drivers and Non-Drivers. Journal of Safety Science, Volume 50, Issue 2, February 2012, pp 333-341. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092575351100258X

       

      Young, K., & Stanley, L. Voice Activated Texting-Is It Safer than Conventional Texting While Driving? National Council for Undergraduate Research Annual Conference, Ogden, Utah 2012, https://ncur.weber.edu/ncur/search/Display_NCUR.aspx?id=62324

       

      McGowen, P., & Stanley, L. An Alternative Methodology for Determining Gap Acceptance, Journal of Transportation Engineering, doi:10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000358. 2011, http://ascelibrary.org/teo/resource/1/jtpexx/v1/i1/p267_s1?isAuthorized=no

       

      Stanley, L., Angell, L., Perez, M., Deering, R., Llaneras, R, and Green, C. Modeling/Analysis of Pedestrian Back-Over Crashes from NHTSA’s SCI Database. Society of Automotive Engineers International, doi:10.4271/2011-01-0588, 2011.

       

      Stanley, L. & Hoyt, T. A Service Learning Case Study for the Ergonomics Classroom. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Conference Proceedings, September 2011. vol. 55 no. 1525-1529 http://pro.sagepub.com/content/55/1/525.abstract

       

      Stanley, L., Angell, L., Perez, M., Deering, R., Llaneras, R, and Green, C. Modeling/Analysis of Pedestrian Back-Over Crashes from NHTSA’s SCI Database. SAE International Journal of Passenger Cars– Mechanical Systems, Volume 4, pgs 562-571, 2011. http://saepcmech.saejournals.org/content/4/1/562.full.pdf+html

       

      Stanley, L., Page, L., and Plumb, C. Designing for the Disabled in the Engineering Classroom, Frontiers in Education Conference/American Society of Engineering Education Proceedings, October, 2010. 978-1-4244-6262-9/10, IEEE. http://fie-conference.org/fie2010/papers/1307.pdf

       

      Sanddal T., Sanddal N., Ward N. & Stanley L. Ambulance Crash Characteristics in the U.S. Defined by the Popular Press: A Retrospective Analysis. Emergency Medicine International, vol. 2010, Article ID 525979, 7 pages, 2010. http://www.hindawi.com/journals/emi/2010/525979/

       

      Hoyt, T., Stanley, L., and Sanddal, N. Rural EMS Worker Restraint Usage and Feasibility in Emergency Response Vehicles, Annals of Advances in Automotive Medicine, 2010.

       

      Stanley, L. and Ward, N. An Evaluation of Cooperative Avoidance Warning System. International Journal of Vehicle Safety, Volume 5, Number 1, 2010, pages 86-99. http://inderscience.metapress.com/app/home/contribution.asp?referrer=parent&backto=issue,6,6;journal,3,16;linkingpublicationresults,1:119746,1

       

      Atkins, P. and Stanley, L. Design and Evaluation of a Collision Avoidance System for Cyclists. The IMAGE Society Annual Conference Proceedings, June 2009.

       

      Antin, J., Stanley, L., and Cicaro, K. Conventional vs. Moving-Map Navigation Methods: Efficiency and Safety Evaluation. Transportation Research Record, No 2138, 34-41, 2009. http://pubsindex.trb.org/view.aspx?id=880812

       

      Stanley, L. and Mueller, J. Effectiveness of a Multistage Driver Education Program for Novice Drivers. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Proceedings, October 2009 vol. 53 no. 181348-1352 http://pro.sagepub.com/content/53/18/1348.abstract

       

      Mueller, J. and Stanley, L. Differences in Self-Reported versus Department of Motor Vehicle in Citation History for Teen Drivers, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)’s National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA) Proceedings, April 2009.

       

      Antin, J., Stanley, L., and Cicaro, K. Conventional vs. Moving-Map Navigation Methods: Efficiency and Safety Evaluation. TRB 2009 Annual Meeting CD-ROM. Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC. http://pubsindex.trb.org/view.aspx?id=880359

       

      Antin, J. F., Lockhart, T., Shi, W., Stanley, L., Haynes, C., Parajit, P., and Guo, F. Why do older drivers give up their keys? The role of functional impairment. International Conference on Traffic & Transport Psychology, Washington, D.C. (2008). http://www.icttp.com/presentations/pdfs/O73.pdf

       

      Marley, R., Stanley, L. and Muthumani, A. Recent evolutions in the curricula of leading industrial engineering programs within the United States. Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Industrial Engineering—Theory, Applications and Practice, Las Vegas, NV, 2008, pp 330-334.

       

      Stanley, L. Human Factors in Transportation Safety. National Science Foundation Women in IE Academia Workshop Proceedings, U.S., Turkey, and the Middle East, July 2008.

       

      Stanley, L. and Marley, R. Recent Evolutions in the Curricula of Leading Industrial Engineering Programs within the U.S. Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Industrial Engineering—Theory, Applications and Practice, September 2008, pp 330-334.

       

      Stanley, L. and Kelly, M. Validating Transportation Safety Deployments and Highway Design Elements in Simulated Environments. Canadian Multidisciplinary Road Safety Conference Proceedings, June 2008. http://www.carsp.ca/documents/750

       

      Stanley, L., Marley, Robert, J. and Kelly, M. Design of Interfaces for Advanced Crash Avoidance Systems. Proceedings of the Annual Conference on Industrial Engineering—Theory, Applications and Practice, November 2007, pp. 767-773

       

      Kelly, M., Lassacher, S., and Stanley, L. Formative Evaluation of Engineering Designs using Driver Performance in an Immersive Driving Simulator. Fourth International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment Training and Vehicle Design Proceedings, July 2007, pgs. 431- 437. http://drivingassessment.uiowa.edu/DA2007/PDF/071_KellyLassacher.pdf

       

      Stanley, L ., Marley, R., and Kelly, M. Haptic and Auditory Cues for Roadway Departure Warnings. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Proceedings, October 2006, vol. 50 no. 222405-2408. http://pro.sagepub.com/content/50/22/2405.abstract

       

      Stanley, L., Hardy, A., and Lassacher S. Driver Responses to Enhanced Wildlife Advisories in a Simulated Environment. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board, 2006, No. 1980, pp 126-133. http://trb.metapress.com/content/j4346607853m00l0/

       

      Stanley, L., Marley, R. Whole Body Vibrations on the Low Back Using a Suspension Versus Non-Suspension Seat Post During Off-Road Cycling. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise Journal, Volume 38(5), May 2006. http://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Citation/2006/05001/Whole_Body_Vibrations_on_the_Low_Back_Using_a.1368.aspx

       

      Stanley, L., Hardy, A., and Lassacher, S. Enhanced Wildlife Warnings as a Potential Means of Reducing Wildlife-Vehicle Collision. National Rural ITS Conference Proceedings, August 2006.

       

      Stanley, L., Hardy, A., and Lassacher, S. Driver Responses to Enhanced Wildlife Advisories in a Simulated Environment. TRB 2006 Annual Meeting CD-ROM. Transportation Research Board: Washington, DC. http://pubsindex.trb.org/view.aspx?id=880359  

       

      Stanley, L. and Philip, D. Development of a Web-Based Household Travel Survey. Institute of Transportation Engineers District 6 Meeting Proceedings, July 2005.

       

      Stanley, L., Kelly, M., and Lassacher, Suzanne. Driver Performance While Interacting with the 511 Travel Information System in Urban and Rural Traffic. Third International Driving Symposium on Human Factors in Driver Assessment Training and Vehicle Design Proceedings, June 2005, pages 486-492 http://drivingassessment.uiowa.edu/DA2005/PDF/71_Stanley_Kellyformat.pdf

    • Student Resources

      Your resource for conducting research...

      IRB Forms and Process, CITI Training, Logging your Hours Worked in MSU MyInfo

    • Lab Director-Laura M. Stanley, PhD, CPE

      Associate Professor, Gianforte School of Computing, Montana State University

      Director of Human Interaction Lab, Gianforte School of Computing, Montana State University

      Adjunct Associate Professor Faculty, Industrial Engineering Department, Clemson University

      Clinical Associate Professor, Clemson University School of Health Research, Clemson University

      Former Program Director - National Science Foundation, CISE Directorate, Cyber-Human Systems Program

       

      Research interests include:

      • Human-Computer Interaction 
      • Virtual, Mixed, & Augmented Reality 
      • Human-Robot Interaction
      • Human-Artificial Intelligence Collaboration
      • Digital Mental Health 

      Education:

      BS - Industrial & Systems Engineering, Virginia Tech

      MS - Industrial & Management Engineering, Montana State University

      Ph.D. - Engineering, Option: Industrial Engineering, Montana State University

      Dr. Laura Stanley is a passionate educator and researcher and has a zest for pushing academic boundaries with her technology inspired pursuits. A professor at Montana State University where she studies human-computer interaction, e.g. projects include immersive technologies for pain and anxiety management for children with cancer and mixed reality (e.g., imagine a hologram therapist) coupled with artificial intelligence to aid those with addictions. She is also using a similar mechanism for human-robot interaction. Dr. Stanley holds three degrees in engineering, a B.S. from Virginia Tech, M.S. and Ph.D. from Montana State University and has authored 72 peer-reviewed publications and acquired $13M in research funding. She served as a Program Officer at the National Science Foundation where she helped to shape the nation’s research agenda. Inspiring Dr. Stanley is the advancement of minorities in engineering and computer science; believing in the power of STEM to help others. Her research ideas often happen while fly fishing and wandering around Montana’s open spaces.

       

      Funding:

      National Science Foundation, Montana Department of Transportation United States Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Murdock Charitable Trust, General Motors, Volvo, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Association, Engineering Information Foundation, South Carolina Research Authority, and Greenville Health Systems.

       

      E-mail: laura.stanley at montana.edu

    • Unsolicited Advice to Proposers from a

      National Science Foundation (NSF) Program Officer

      Includes thoughts from my NSF service as Program Director (CISE Directorate - Cyber Human Systems Group) from 2015-2016 as well as words from those who came before me at NSF (thank you to Dr. Jeff Trinkle, former NSF Program Director, for many of the inserts below)

      How to Become a Successful NSF PI? Some Inside Insights from Former Program Directors

       

      Is it a fundable research idea?

      Whether you have a firm idea of the research direction you want to pursue or not, following the steps below will help you home in on a competitive research direction.

      • Read program solicitations to find the ones that seem closest to your research interests and goals.
      • Think about how your research interests and goals could support the vision and goals of the solicitations. (You may have to morph your research goals a bit or take some liberties with stated program goals.)
      • For the solicitations that fit you best, read all the abstracts of projects funded over the last two years and see if you can find an important gap that your research could fill.
      • Now it is time to talk to the cognizant program directors of the programs that fit you best. If your best fit is Cyber Human Systems, talk to me or other program directors in that cluster. For other programs, you will have found the relevant program directors during the previous steps. Contact them directly. Not only will this discussion help you fine-tune your plan, but it's an important way to help research programs evolve to maintain their relevance and vitality, and thus is an important contribution to the research community.
      • In cases where the intellectual contributions of your project are significant with respect to two or more programs, you should contact program officers in both programs to discuss your project goals. If the associated program managers see the value of your project to their programs and know of the other program mangers' interests, they could agree to jointly fund a project that none of their programs would or could fund alone.

      Some keys to preparing a competitive proposal ...

      • Answer these questions clearly and concisely in the project summary and introduction: (1) What is the problem? (2) Why is it important to solve? (3) Which parts of the problem will you solve? (4) How will those problems be attacked? The second question points to potential broader impacts of the research. The third and fourth point to the core intellectual contributions, which help a program manager find the most appropriate reviewers.
      • Try to appeal to wide audience, since the breadth of topics and technical approaches appearing in a single panel can be very wide. An application with a clear positive societal impact (even if 10 years out), an insightful discussion of the most relevant previous work and on-going research projects, and a prediction of the technical impact the research could have on the field are extremely important.
      • To emphasize the importance of questions (3) and (4) above, clearly state in the proposal summary and introduction, the area in which your primary intellectual contribution will be. Some proposers write Intellectual Merit statements that are impressively broad, but obscure the area of the primary contribution, which makes it hard for program directors to identify the most appropriate reviewers.
      • Demonstrate total command of the relevant literature by citing the earliest key results, not only the most recent relevant results. Also you should avoid writing, "...to the best of my knowledge..." This just draws attention to the fact that you believe you might not be on top of all the relevant literature. If you think you can't avoid it, go back to the literature.
      • Never dispense with a large swath of the literature by simply saying, "Most research on topic A takes approach X, but I will use approach Y." What's important here is to make clear that your approach is worthy of pursuit in comparison to all other existing approaches, not just the majority (possibly, misguided) approach. If you're going to use a statement like this to give perspective, follow it up with statements that cover the minority approaches too, since they could be the current best and most similar to yours.
      • Do not simply pose research challenges in your research plan. Also offer plausible ways to tackle them.
      • If your proposal is not funded, the reviews can be very valuable in formulating a resubmission. There is often both a "consensus" panel review, and individual reviews. The individual reviews may include comments that others did not agree with, and which are not reflected in the consensus review, but the individual reviews may also have more specifics for you to consider. Your program director may be able to help you interpret the reviews.
      • One of the most valuable experiences for writing proposals is serving on a review panel with other reviewers. Tell your program director that you are interested in doing this, either in his/her program or another one.
      • Ask your senior colleagues to let you read their successful proposals, and maybe even their reviews. Also ask them to read your declined proposal and reviews to help you understand how to make it competitive.

      Some advice from others

      Preparing for a productive meeting with a Program Director:

      • To make the best use of your time and that of the program director, do your homework, that is, carry out as many of the steps for identifying a fundable research project as possible.
      • Prepare a 1-page white paper w/short answers to the following questions before talking with a program director: 

      (1) What is the problem?

      (2) Why is it important to solve?

      (3) Which parts of the problem will you solve and how?

      (4) What is the intellectual merit of your proposal?

      (5) How does this fit Cyber Human Systems (CHS) program?

       

      How to Approach your National Science Foundation Program Director ​

      1. If you don’t hear back on your first contact (phone or email), what is the best next step and where is the line between persistence and annoyance?

       

      It is generally suggested that you start with an e-mail, because many PDs are out of the office for various reasons (meetings, panels, conferences, independent research activities, etc.). PDs are very busy so give them a week to respond, many will respond within a day or two. If the PD does not respond after 2x, then try to contact another PD within that program. It is recommended that you contact one PD in the program, instead of all PDs in that program. By sending a note to all it often times because unclear who should respond, risking the chance of it falling deeper in their mailbox, resulting in no response at all.

       

      2. How much about your grant idea should you share when reaching out via email? 1 page, 2 pages? What should that info include?

       

      Because time is of essence most PDs will only want a one-page summary, definitely no more than two pages. They always work to treat everyone fairly, so what they do for they must do for everyone. This is why they cannot read an entire 15-page proposal to provide feedback, there is not enough time in doing so for everyone. In your project summary, you should strive to answer these questions clearly and concisely: (1) What is the problem? (2) Why is it important to solve? (3) Which parts of the problem will you solve? (4) How will those problems be attacked? (5) How does this fit the particular program of interest? Pertaining to question #5, this tells the PD whether you have done the homework necessary to determine the proper fit for the idea. Or it may help them in providing “fit” advice. That is many times a proposer may think their idea fits a certain program, division, or directorate but often times it doesn’t and this is where the PD can help. Work with mentors who have been successful on proposals to NSF, seek out those who will give you honest and constructive feedback, rather than those who simply say “looks great, submit”. Critical feedback from more experienced folks is critical to success at NSF!

       

      3. What are some of the best questions you have had/asked? Don’t be shy to bring forth “crazy” ideas; NSF is the place for such ideas!

       

      NSF is one of the only agencies that funds work on potentially “crazy” ideas that may lead to transformative ideas in terms of intellectual merit and broader impacts.

       

      4. Are there any questions you would recommend NOT asking?

       

      Gather what your interests and passions are and write for that. Don’t ask the PD what they would like funded and what their interests are in and write to that. PDs, for the most part, were once/are academics so they understand the granting process, funding students, publishing students, tenure process, etc. They have a very good understanding of the university system and how to navigate that path. PDs encourage communication, there will never be any negative consequences to speaking with PD, e.g. won’t hurt your chances for future funding etc. Feel comfortable asking them questions. Seek them out early in the grant writing process to ensure your idea is a good fit and if not where a good fit may be.

       

      5. What is the goal of the program officer in these conversations? What is the goal of the faculty member?

       

      The goal of the faculty member is to of course secure funding to fund your research, students, obtain tenure so forth and so on. The NSF PD knows this but what they want to hear is what it is that you are excited and passionate about in a clear and concise manner. PDs may not have expertise in your area, most likely they will not, so you will need to be generalists to some degree when conveying your idea. The PDs role is to encourage you to submit assuming it’s a good fit for their program or to help you navigate where may be the better home. As a proposer realize that you will be declined, the funding rate within my own program is from ~6% (CHS: LARGE) ~25% (CHS:CRII) depending on the solicitation. As a new faculty member write your PD and ask them if you can serve on a panel (send an e-mail with your CV attached) so that you can understand the review process. It is OK if you have never served or have not been successful via NSF funding mechanisms.

       

      (Thank you to PDs in Cyber-Human Systems Program!)

    Cookie Use
    We use cookies to ensure a smooth browsing experience. By continuing we assume you accept the use of cookies.
    Learn More