The vigilance decrement is a central topic in human factors research but has not yet given way to a clear theoretical understanding. Resource depletion theory, the most popular account of the effect, provides at best a qualitative and vague model of vigilance performance. More precise predictions are necessary for strong theory testing. The current study developed a computational account of the vigilance decrement, building on a quantitative, dynamic cognitive model of signal detection. The model reproduces supposed hallmark patterns of resource depletion, without incorporating a depletion process. Results suggest that a stronger emphasis on computational modeling can provide more concrete theories of the vigilance decrement and help resolve lingering points of disagreement in theories of sustained attention.
FrauliniN. W.HancockG. M.NeigelA. R.ClaypooleV. L.SzalmaJ. L. (2017). A critical examination of the research and theoretical underpinnings discussed in Thomson, Besner, and Smilek (2016). Psychological Review, 124(4), 525–531. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000066
2.
GreenD. M.SwetsJ. A. (1966). Signal detection theory and psychophysics. Wiley.
3.
HautusM. J.MacmillanN. A.CreelmanC. D. (Eds.). (2022). Detection theory: A user’s guide (3rd ed.). Routledge.
HeltonW. S.WenJ. (2023). Will the real resource theory please stand up! Vigilance is a renewable resource and should be modeled as such. Experimental Brain Research, 241(5), 1263–1270. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00221-023-06604-x
6.
MackworthN. H. (1948). The breakdown of vigilance during prolonged visual search. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1(1), 6–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470214808416738
7.
NeigelA. R.ClaypooleV. L.SmithS. L.WaldfogleG. E.FrauliniN. W.HancockG. M.HeltonW. S.SzalmaJ. L. (2020). Engaging the human operator: A review of the theoretical support for the vigilance decrement and a discussion of practical applications. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 21(2), 239–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/1463922x.2019.1682712
ParasuramanR. (1979). Memory load and event rate control sensitivity decrements in sustained attention. Science, 205(4409), 924–927. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.472714
10.
SeeJ. E.HoweS. R.WarmJ. S.DemberW. N. (1995). Meta-analysis of the sensitivity decrement in vigilance. Psychological Bulletin, 117(2), 230–349.
11.
SwetsJ. A. (1977). Signal detection theory applied to vigilance. In MackieR. R. (Ed.), Vigilance (pp. 705–718). Springer.
12.
ThomsonD. R.BesnerD.SmilekD. (2016). A critical examination of the evidence for sensitivity loss in modern vigilance tasks. Psychological Review, 123(1), 70–83. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000021
13.
TurnerB. M.Van ZandtT.BrownS. (2011). A dynamic stimulus-driven model of signal detection. Psychological Review, 118(4), 583–613. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025191
14.
van DongenN.van BorkR.FinnemannA.HaslbeckJ. M. B.van der MaasH. L. J.RobinaughD. J.de RonJ.SprengerJ.BorsboomD. (2025). Productive explanation: A framework for evaluating explanations in psychological science. Psychological Review, 132(2), 311–329. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000479
15.
WarmJ. S.FinomoreV. S.VidulichM. A.FunkeM. E. (2015). Vigilance: A perceptual challenge. In HoffmanR. R.HancockP. A.ScerboM. W.ParasuramanR.SzalmaJ. L. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of applied perception research (pp. 241–283). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511973017.018
16.
WienerE. L. (1963). Knowledge of results and signal rate in monitoring: A transfer of training approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 47(3), 214–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0048038
