Researchers in Human Factors and psychology are frequently interested in measuring mental workload, the limitation and capacity of the human cognitive system. Empirical data show that workload measures, although generally correlated, demonstrate disagreement in some instances. In the current work, I present a systematic investigation of the determinants of association and dissociation between subjective and objective estimates of. Specifically, I focus on the distinction between task-driven (bottom-up) efforts and goal-driven (top-down) efforts, based on findings from the metacognition literature. In three experiments, an Oddball task was performed individually or concurrently with a tracking task while task-driven and goal-driven efforts were manipulated. Subjective workload (SWL) associated with performance when efforts were task-driven, but not when goal-driven. SWL and the P3 event-related potential dissociated when efforts were goal-driven, but showed an inconsistent pattern when efforts were task-driven. These results are discussed and explained within the theoretical framework of metacognition and dual-process theories.
CooperG. E.HarperR. P. (1969). The Use of Pilot Ratings in the Evaluation of Aircraft Handling Qualities. Advisory Group for Aerospace Research and Development Neuilly-Sur-Seine, AGARD- 567, 1–56.
5.
De NeysW. (2006). Automatic-heuristic and executive-analytic processing during reasoning: Chronometric and dual-task considerations. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(6), 1070–1100. http://doi.org/10.1080/02724980543000123
6.
DonchinE.ColesM. G. H. (1988). Is the P300 component a manifestation of context updating?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 11(3), 357. http://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00058027
7.
EstesS. (2015). The Workload Curve: Subjective Mental Workload. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. http://doi.org/10.1177/0018720815592752
8.
GopherD.DonchinE. (1986). Workload - An examination of the concept. In Handbook of perception and human performance, Vol. 2, Cognitive processes and performance (p. 41,1–41,49).
9.
HartS. G.StavelandL. E. (1988). Development of NASA- TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research. Advances in Psychology, 52, 139–183.
10.
HerrmannC. S.KnightR. T. (2001). Mechanisms of human attention: Event-related potentials and oscillations. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 25(6), 465–476. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0149-7634(01)00027-6
KidaT.NishihiraY.HattaA.WasakaT.TazoeT.SakajiriY. …
HigashiuraT. (2004). Resource allocation and somatosensory P300 amplitude during dual task: Effects of tracking speed and predictability of tracking direction. Clinical Neurophysiology, 115(11), 2616–2628. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2004.06.013
16.
KokA. (1998). On the utility of P3 amplitude as a measure of processing capacity. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 30(1–2), 67. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8760(98)90168-4
17.
KoriatA.NussinsonR. (2009). Attributing Study Effort to Data-Driven and Goal-Driven Effects: Implications for Metacognitive Judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 35(5), 1338–1343. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0016374
18.
KoriatA.NussinsonR.AckermanR. (2014). Judgments of learning depend on how learners interpret study effort. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 40(6), 1624–1637. http://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000009
19.
KramerA. F. (1990). Physiological metrics of mental workload: A review of recent progress. Multiple-Task Performance, (June), 279–328. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/2060/19900020461
20.
MiyakeS.YamadaS.ShojiT.TakaeY.KugeN.YamamuraT. (2009). Physiological responses to workload change. A test/retest examination. Applied Ergonomics, 40(6), 987–996. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2009.02.005
NelsonT.NarensL. (1990). Metamemory: a theoretical framework and new findings. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 26, 125– 173. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-7421(08)60053-5
ParasuramanR.WilsonG. F. (2008). Putting the Brain to Work : Neuroergonomics Past, Present, and Future. Human Factors, 50(3), 468–474. http://doi.org/10.1518/001872008X288349.
25.
PolichJ. (2007). Updating P300: an integrative theory of P3a and P3b. Clinical Neurophysiology : Official Journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology, 118(10), 2128–48. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinph.2007.04.019
26.
ReidG. B.NygrenT. E. (1988). The Subjective Workload Assessment Technique: A Scaling Procedure for Measuring Mental Workload. Advances in Psychology, 52(C), 185–218. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62387-0
27.
RubioS.DíazE.MartínJ.PuenteJ. M. (2004). Evaluation of Subjective Mental Workload: A Comparison of SWAT, NASA-TLX, and Workload Profile Methods. Applied Psychology, 53(1), 61–86. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1464-0597.2004.00161.x
28.
SchneiderW.ShiffrinR. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: I. Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84(1), 1–66. http://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.1.1
29.
WickensC. D. (1984). Processing Resources in Attention. In ParasuramanR.DaviesR. (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 63–102).
30.
WickensC. D. (2002). Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3(2), 159–177. http://doi.org/10.1080/14639220210123806
YoungM. S.BrookhuisK. A.WickensC. D.HancockP. A. (2015). State of science: mental workload in ergonomics. Ergonomics, 58(1), 1–17. http://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2014.956151
