Vigilance research often utilizes training to prepare observers for the monotony associated with these types of tasks. Although performance benefits have been shown previously for training, little evidence exists for the subjective effects training for vigilance can impose. The goal of this study is to investigate the effects of two types of training, practice and knowledge of results (KR), on observers’ perceived levels of mental workload and stress. The study makes use of the NASA-TLX and Dundee Stress State Questionnaire (DSSQ) to measure these effects. The results indicate that observers benefit subjectively from both types of training, but in potentially different manners. We discuss the differences in the effects on mental workload and stress, as well as the potential impact on training for vigilance in the future.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BeckerA. B.WarmJ. S.DemberW. N.HoweS. R. (1994). Specific and non-specific transfer effects in training for vigilance. In: ParasuramanR.MoulouaM. (Eds.), Human performance in automated systems: Current research and trends (pp. 294-299). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
2.
HartS. G.StavelandL. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (task load index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In HancockP. A.MeshkatiN. (Eds.), Human mental workload (pp. 139–183). Oxford, UK: North-Holland.
3.
HeltonW. S.MatthewsG.WarmJ. S. (2009). Stress state mediation between environmental variables and performance: The case of noise and vigilance. Acta psychologica, 130, 204-213.
4.
JohnsonA.ProctorR. W. (2004). Attention: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
5.
KlugerA. N.DeNisiA. (1996). The effects of feedback interventions on performance: A historical review, a meta-analysis, and a preliminary feedback intervention theory. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 254–284.
6.
MatthewsG.EmoA. K.FunkeG. J. (2005). A short version of the Dundee Stress State Questionnaire. In Twelfth Meeting of the International Society for the Study of Individual Differences, Adelaide, Australia.
7.
MatthewsG.JoynerL.GillilandK.CampbellS. E.FalconerS.HugginsJ. (1999). Validation of a comprehensive stress state questionnaire: Towards a state ‘Big Three’?. In MervieldeI.DearyI. J.De FruytF.OstendorfF. (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 335–350). Tilburg, the Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
ParasuramanR (1986). Cognitive processes and performance. In BoffK. R.KaufmanL.ThomasJ. P. (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance, (pp.1-39). Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons.
10.
SalmoniA. WSchmidtR. A.WalterC. B. (1984). Knowledge of results and motor learning: A review and critical reappraisal. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 355-386.
11.
SchneiderW.1985, Training high-performance skills: fallacies and guidelines, Human Factors, 27, 285-300.
12.
SeeJ. E.HoweS. R.WarmJ. S.DemberW. N. (1995). Meta-analysis of the sensitivity decrement in vigilance. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 230–249.
13.
SeeJ. E.WarmJ. S.DemberW. N.HoweS. R. (1997). Vigilance and signal detection theory: An empirical evaluation of five measures of response bias. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 39, 14-29.
14.
SzalmaJ. L.HancockP. A.WarmJ. S.DemberW. N.ParsonsK. S. (2006). Training for vigilance: Using predictive power to evaluate feedback effectiveness. Human factors, 48, 682-692.
15.
SzalmaJ. L.TeoG. W. (2012). Spatial and temporal task characteristics as stress: A test of the dynamic adaptability theory of stress, workload, and performance. Acta psychologica, 139, 471-485.
16.
SzalmaJ. L.WarmJ. S.MatthewsG.DemberW. N.WeilerE. M.MeierA.EggemeierF. T. (2004). Effects of sensory modality and task duration on performance, workload, and stress in sustained attention. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 46, 219-233.
17.
TempleJ. G.WarmJ. S.DemberW. N.JonesK. S.LaGrangeC. M.MatthewsG. (2000). The effects of signal salience and caffeine on performance, workload, and stress in an abbreviated vigilance task. Human Factors, 42, 183-194.
18.
WarmJ. S.DemberW. N.HancockP.A. (1996). Vigilance and workload in automated systems. In ParasuramanR.MoulouaM. (Eds.), Automation and human performance: Theory and applications (pp. 183–200). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
WarmJ. S.JerisonH. J. (1984). The psychophysics of vigilance. In WarmJ. S. (Ed.), Sustained attention in human performance (pp. 15–59). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
20.
WarmJ. S.ParasuramanR.MatthewsG. (2008). Vigilance requires hard mental work and is stressful. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 50, 433-441.
