Seventy-two subjects each performed for one hour on a visual vigilance task incorporating two kinds of signal, A and B, of which A was the easier to recognize. For 36 subjects, signal A occurred with a probability of 0.05, signal B with 0.15; for the remaining subjects these probabilities were reversed. Subjects were instructed either to look for one signal only (A or B), or to look for both. Results indicate that, whereas the additional requirement of looking for a second signal had a differential effect, reducing the discriminability of signal A, but depressing the differential response bias towards signal B, signal probability predictably influenced only the response bias towards signals A and B.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsJ. A.Experimental studies of human vigilance.United States Air Force ESD Technical Documentary Report, 1963, No. 63-320
2.
AlluisiE. A.CoatesG. D.MorganB. B.Effects of temporal stressors on vigilance and information processing. In MackieR. R. (Ed.) Vigilance: Theory, operational performance, and physiological correlates.New York: Plenum, 1977, 361–421
3.
BaddeleyA. D.ColquhounW. P.Signal probability and vigilance; a reappraisal of the signal-rate effect.British Journal of Psychology, 1969, 60, 169–178
4.
ChapmanD. E.SinclairM. A.Ergonomics in inspection tasks in industry. In DruryC. G.FoxJ. G. (Eds.) Human reliability in quality control.London: Taylor & Francis, 1975, 231–251
5.
CraigA.Signal recognition and the probability-matching decision rule.Perception & Psychophysics, 1976, 20, 157–162
6.
CraigA.Broadbent and Gregory revisited: vigilance and statistical decision.Human Factors, 1977, 19, 25–36
7.
CraigA.Is the vigilance decrement simply a response adjustment towards probability matching?Human Factors, 1978, 20, 441–446
8.
CraigA.ColquhounW. P.Vigilance effects in complex inspection. In MackieR. R. (Ed.) Vigilance: Theory, operational performance, and physiological correlates.New York: Plenum, 1977, 239–262
9.
ElliottE.Perception and alertness.Ergonomics, 1960, 3, 357–364
10.
FoxJ. G.Vigilance and arousal: a key to maintaining inspectors' performance. In DruryC. G.FoxJ. G. (Eds.) Human reliability in quality control.London: Taylor & Francis, 1975, 89–96
11.
FoxJ. G.Quality control of coins. In WeinerJ. S.MauleJ. G. (Eds.) Case studies in ergonomics practice. (Vol. 1) Human factors in work, design and production.London: Taylor & Francis, 1977, 101–130
12.
GilliesG. J.Glass inspection. In DruryC. G.FoxJ. G. (Eds.) Human reliability in quality control.London: Taylor & Francis, 1975, 273–287
13.
GreenD. M.LuceR. D.Detection of auditory signals presented at random times.Perception & Psychophysics, 1969, 2, 441–450
14.
GreenD. M.SwetsJ. A.Signal detection theory and psychophysics.New York: Wiley, 1966
15.
HowellW. C.JohnstonW. A.GoldsteinI. L.Complex monitoring and its relation to the classical problem of vigilance.Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1966, 1, 129–150
16.
KiblerA. W.The relevance of vigilance research to aerospace monitoring tasks.Human Factors, 1965, 7, 93–99
17.
MackworthJ. F.Vigilance and attention.Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1970
18.
MoraalJ.The analysis of an inspection task in the steel industry. In DruryC. G.FoxJ. G. (Eds.) Human reliability in quality control.London: Taylor & Francis, 1975, 217–230
19.
SmithR. L.LucacciniL. F.Vigilance research: its application to industrial problems.Human Factors, 1969, 11, 149–156
20.
SwetsJ. A.Signal detection theory applied to vigilance. In MackieR. R. (Ed.) Vigilance: Theory, operational performance, and physiological correlates.New York: Plenum, 1977, 705–718
21.
VickersD.LearyJ.BarnesP.Adaptation to decreasing signal probability. In MackieR. R. (Ed.) Vigilance: Theory, operational performance, and physiological correlates.New York: Plenum, 1977, 679–703
22.
WilligesR. C.Within-session criterion changes compared to an ideal observer criterion in a visual monitoring task.Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1969, 81, 61–66
23.
WilligesR. C.The vigilance increment: an ideal observer hypothesis. In SheridanT. B.JohannsenG. (Eds.) Monitoring behavior and supervisory control.New York: Plenum, 1976, 181–190
