We investigate how mild motion sickness and soporific symptoms affect cognitive strategy when performing in a multitasking environment. During two 1-hour sessions, subjects (N=39) performed four concurrent tasks (memory, arithmetic, visual, auditory). Analysis of the cognitive strategy is based on task dwell time, defined as the amount of time the screen cursor is in each task screen quadrant. Results show that the arithmetic task consistently suffers from the development of motion sickness symptoms, and increased drowsiness. Symptomatic individuals reduce the time allocated to the complex arithmetic task and increase time to the, simpler, visual task. Furthermore, symptomatic individuals demonstrate increased reaction time of correct responses in the arithmetic task, and decreased number of responses. Results provide evidence that motion sickness and soporific symptoms affect multitasking cognitive strategy with symptomatic individuals shifting focus from more complex to simpler tasks. We discuss a plausible explanation based on the performance-under-stress perspective.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BakerC. H. (1966). Motion and human performance: a review of the literature (Technical Report No. 770 -1 Section I). Goleta, California: Human Factors Research.
2.
BiegH. J.ChuangL. L.FlemingR. W.ReitererH.BülthoffH. H. (2010). Eye and Pointer Coordination in Search and Selection Tasks. Paper presented at the Symposium on Eye-Tracking Research & Applications, New York, USA.
3.
BosJ. E. (2011). Less sickeness with more motion and related issues (Final Report No. TNO-DV 2011 A154). Soesterberg, The Netherlands: TNO, Behavioural and Societal Sciences.
4.
BourneL. E.YaroushR. A. (2003). STRESS AND COGNITION : A COGNITIVE PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE National Aeronautics and Space Administration Grant Number NAG2-1561 Outline Stress and Cognition : A Cognitive Psychological Perspective. Stress The International Journal on the Biology of Stress, 1-121.
5.
BuscherG.BiedertR.HeineschD.DengelA. (2010, April10-15). Eye Tracking Analysis of Preferred Reading Regions on the Screen. Paper presented at the CHI 2010, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
6.
ChenM. C.AndersonJ. R.SohnM. H. (2001). What can a mouse cursor tell us more?: correlation of eye/mouse movements on web browsing. Paper presented at the CHI ’01 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems.
7.
CorreiaM. J.GuedryF. E. (1966). Modification of vestibular responses as a function of rate of rotation about an Earthhorizontal axis. Acta Otolaryngologica, 62(4), 297-308.
8.
ElsmoreT. (1994). Synwork1: A pc-based tool for assessment of performance in a simulated work environment. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 26(4), 421-426.
9.
GianarosP. J.MuthE. R.MordkoffJ. T.LevineM. E.SternR. M. (2001). A questionnaire for the assessment of the multiple dimensions of motion sickness. Aviat Space Environ Med, 72(2), 115-119.
10.
GraybielA. (1968). Structural elements in the concept of motion sickness. NAMI-1055. Pensacola, Florida: Naval Aerospace Medical Institute.
11.
GraybielA.KneptonJ. (1976). Sopite syndrome: a sometimes sole manifestation of motion sickness. Aviation Space and Environmental Medicine, 47(8), 873-882.
12.
GuoQ.AgichteinE. (2010, April10-15). Towards Predicting Web Searcher Gaze Position from Mouse Movements. Paper presented at the CHI, Atlanta, Georgia.
13.
HancockP. A.WarmJ. S. (1989). A Dynamic Model of Stress and Sustained Attention. Human Factors, 31(5), 519-537.
14.
HettingerL. J.KennedyR. S.McCauleyM. E. (1990). Motion and Human Performance. In CramptonG. H. (Ed.), Motion and space sickness (Vol. 1, pp. 411-441). Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
15.
HoddesE.DementW. C.ZarconeV. (1972). The development and use of the Stanford sleepiness scale (SSS). Psychophysiology, 9, 150-151.
16.
MeyerD. E.KierasD. E. (1997). A computational theory of executive cognitive processes and multiple-task performance: Part 1. Basic mechanism. Physiology Review(104), 3-65.
17.
MoneyK. E. (1970). Motion sickness. Physiol Rev, 50(1), 1-39.
18.
OswaldF. L.HambrickD. Z.JonesL. A. (2007). Keeping all plates spinning: Understanding and predicting multitasking performance. In JonassenD. H. (Ed.), Learning to solve complex scientific problems (pp. 77-96). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
PewR. W.MavorA. S. (1998). Attention and multitasking. In Modeling human and organizational behavior: Application to military simulations (pp. 432). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
20.
SalasE.DriskellJ. E.HughesS. (1996). Introduction: The study of stress and human performance. In DriskellJ. E.SalasE. (Eds.), Stress and Human Performance (pp. 1-45). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
21.
SchunnC. D.McGregorM. U.SanerL. D. (2005). Expertise in ill-defined problem solving domains as effective strategy use. Memory and Cognition, 33, 1377-1387.
22.
SieglerR. S. (1988). Strategy choice procedures and the development of multiplication skill. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 117, 258-275.
23.
SperlingG.DosherB. A. (1986). Strategy and optimization in human information processing. In BoffK. R.KaufmanL.ThomasJ. (Eds.), Handbook of perception and performance (Vol. 1, pp. 1-65). New York: Wiley.
24.
ValkP. J. L.MunnochK.BosJ. E. (2008, 29-31January). Human Performance at Sea: effects on vigilance and complex task performance. Paper presented at the ABCD Symposium “Human Performance in the Maritime Environment” in the Pacific 2008 International Maritime Conference, Sydney, Australia.
25.
WangD. Y.ProctorM. D.PickD. F. (2007). Acquisition and transfer of attention-allocation strategies in a multiple-task work environment. Human Factors, 49(6), 995-1004.
26.
WangD. Y.ProctorR. W.PickD. F. (2009). Allocation of effort as a function of payoffs for individual tasks in a multitasking environment. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 705-716.
27.
YerkesR. M.DodsonJ. D. (1908). The relation of strength of stimulus to rapidity of habit-formation. Journal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology, 18, 459-482.
