Three studies are reported of individual differences in performance of high event rate vigilance tasks. In each study, measures of attentional resource availability and elementary cognitive components of sustained attention were correlated with vigilance performance. It was predicted that correlates of vigilance should vary with two parameters of the task: the type of target discrimination required (simultaneous or successive) and the type of stimuli used (sensory or symbolic). Speed and accuracy of controlled, resource-demanding visual search predicted overall perceptual sensitivity on three out of four successive tasks used, but only one out of four simultaneous tasks, partially confirming the hypothesis that successive tasks are more strongly resource-limited than simultaneous tasks. Other correlates of overall level vigilance did not appear to vary systematically with task parameters. Few correlates of temporal decrement in perceptual sensitivity were found, possibly for statistical reasons. The data suggest that measures of controlled search may be useful in predicting vigilance on certain real-world tasks, although a substantial part of the variance of vigilance tasks may not be predictable fromts short cognitive tasks.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Baddeley, A., Logie, R., and Nimmo-Smith, I. (1985). Components of fluent reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 24, 119–131.
2.
Bakan, P. (1959). Extraversion-introversion and improvement in an auditory vigilance task. British Journal of Psychology, 50, 325–332.
3.
Buckner, D. N., Harabedian, A. and McGrath, J. J. (1966). Individual differences in vigilance performance. Journal of Engineering Psychology, 5, 69–85.
4.
Colquhoun, W. P. (1961). The effects of unwanted signals on performance in a vigilance task. Ergonomics, 4, 41–52.
5.
Craig, A. (1984). Human engineering: The control of vigilance. In J. S. Warm (Ed.), Sustained attention in human performance (pp. 247–291). Chichester: Wiley.
6.
Craig, A., Davies, D. R., and Matthews, G. (1987). Diurnal variation, task characteristics and vigilance performance. Human Factors, 29, 675–684.
7.
Craik, F. I. M., and Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684.
8.
Cronbach, L. J. (1970). Essentials of psychological testing (3rd ed.). New York: Harper & Row.
9.
Cronbach, L. J., and Furby, L. (1970). How should we measure “change”---or should we?. Psychological Bulletin, 74, 68–80.
10.
Davies, D. R., and Parasuraman, R. (1982). The psychology of vigilance.London: Academic.
11.
Dempster, F. N. (1981). Memory span: Sources of individual and developmental differences. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 63–100.
12.
Eriksen, C. W., and Yeh, Y.-Y. (1985). Allocation of attention in the visual field. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 583–597.
13.
Fisk, A. D., and Scerbo, M. W. (1987). Automatic and control processing approach to interpreting vigilance performance: A review and reevaluation. Human Factors, 29, 653–660.
14.
Fisk, A. D., and Schneider, W. (1981). Control and automatic processing during tasks requiring sustained attention: A new approach to vigilance. Human Factors, 23, 737–750.
15.
Ghiselli, E. E. (1966). The validity of occupational aptitude tests.New York: Wiley.
16.
Hirst, W., and Kalmar, D. (1987). Characterizing attentional resources. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 116, 68–81.
17.
Humphreys, M. S., and Revelle, W. (1984). Personality, motivation and performance: A theory of the relationship between individual differences and information processing. Psychological Review, 91, 153–184.
18.
Jerison, H. J. (1977). Vigilance: Biology, psychology, theory, and practice. In R. R. Mackie (Ed.), Vigilance: Theory, operational performance and physiological correlates (pp. 27–40). New York: Plenum.
19.
Koelega, H. S., Brinkman, J. A., Hendriks, L., and Verbaten, M. N. (1989). Processing demands, effort, and individual differences in four different vigilance tasks. Human Factors, 31, 45–62.
20.
Mackie, R. R. (1984). Research relevance and the information glut. In F. A. Muckier (Ed.), Human factors review (pp. 1–11). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors Society.
21.
Mackie, R. R. (1987). Vigilance research---Are we ready for countermeasures?. Human Factors, 29, 707–724.
22.
Matthews, G., Davies, D. R., and Lees, J. L. (1990). Arousal, extraversion, and individual differences in resource availability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 150–168.
23.
Matthews, G., Jones, D. M., and Chamberlain, A. G. (1992). Predictors of individual differences in mail coding skills, and their variation with ability level. Journal of Applied Psychology, 77, 406–418.
24.
Matthews, G., and Margetts, I. (1991). Self-report arousal and divided attention: A study of performance operating characteristics. Human Performance, 4, 107–126.
25.
McGrath, J. J. (1963). Cross-validation of some correlates of vigilance performance. In D. N. Buckner and J. J. McGrath (Eds.), Vigilance: A symposium (pp. 118–122). New York: McGraw-Hill.
26.
Norman, D. A., and Bobrow, D. G. (1975). On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 44–64.
27.
Nuechterlein, K. H. (1983). Signal detection in vigilance tasks and behavioral attributes among offspring of schizophrenic mothers and among hyperactive children. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 92, 4–28.
28.
Nuechterlein, K. H., Parasuraman, R., and Jiang, Q. (1983). Visual vigilance: Image degradation produces rapid sensitivity decrement over time. Science, 220, 327–329.
29.
Parasuraman, R. (1985). Vigilance: A multifactorial approach. In M. I. Posner and O. S. M. Marin (Eds.), Attention and performance (Vol. 11, pp. 493–511). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
30.
Parasuraman, R., and Davies, D. R. (1977). A taxonomic analysis of vigilance performance. In R. R. Mackie (Ed.), Vigilance: Theory, operational performance, and physiological correlates (pp. 559–574). New York: Plenum.
31.
Parasuraman, R., and Mouloua, M. (1987). Interaction of signal discriminability and task type in vigilance decrement. Perception and Psychophysics, 41, 17–22.
32.
Parasuraman, R., Warm, J. S., and Dember, W. N. (1987). Vigilance: Taxonomy and utility. In L. Mark, J. S. Warm, and R. L. Huston (Eds.), Ergonomics and human factors: Recent research (pp. 11–32). New York: Springer-Verlag.
33.
Pollack, I., and Norman, D. A. (1964). A nonparametric analysis of recognition experiments. Psychonomic Science, 1, 125–126.
34.
Posner, M. I. (1978). Chronometric explorations of mind.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
35.
Posner, M. I., Boies, S. J.Eichelman, W. H., and Taylor, R. L. (1969). Retention of visual and name codes of single letters. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monographs, 79 (1, Pt. 2).
36.
Rosvold, H. E., Mirsky, A. F., Sarason, I., Bransome, E. D., and Beck, L. N. (1956). A continuous performance test of brain damage. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 20, 343–350.
37.
Santee, J. L., and Egeth, H. E. (1982). Do reaction time and accuracy measure the same aspects of letter recognition?. Journal of Human Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 489–501.
38.
Schneider, W., and Fisk, A. D. (1982). Concurrent automatic and controlled visual search: Can processing occur without resource cost?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Behavior, 8, 261–278.
39.
Schneider, W., and Shiffrin, R. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1–66.
40.
Snodgrass, J. G., and Corwin, J. (1988). Pragmatics of measuring recognition memory: Applications to dementia and amnesia. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 34–50.
41.
Spring, C., and Capps, C. (1974). Encoding speed, rehearsal, and probed recall of dyslexic boys. Journal of Educational Psychology, 66, 780–786.
42.
Swets, J. A. (1986). Form of empirical ROCs in discrimination and diagnostic tasks: Implications for theory and measurement of performance. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 181–198.
43.
Wickens, C. D. (1984). Engineering psychology and human performance.Columbus, OH: Merrill.
44.
Wiener, E. L. (1975). Individual and group differences in inspection. In C. G. Drury and J. G. Fox (Eds.), Human reliability in quality control (pp. 101–122). London: Taylor & Francis.
