In a complex vigilance task, probability of error was greater with greater load of signals assigned, greater with greater load of locations (channels) assigned, and less with practice. The effect of signal load on errors was greater than that of channel load, and was more strongly influenced by practice. The methodology and results are seen as relevant to sub-task assignment in group vigilance tasks.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BartlettS. C.BernertR. L.GrahamJ. R.Study of visual fatigue and efficiency in radar observation. USAF RADC Tech. Rep., 1955, No. 55-100.
2.
ColquhounW. P.The effect of ‘unwanted’ signals on performance in a vigilance task. Ergonomics, 1961, 4, 41–51.
3.
DeeseJ.OrmondE.Studies of detectability during continuous visual search. USAF, WADC Tech. Rep., 1953, No. 53-8.
4.
FarrellF.NicolE.RobyT. B.The effect of knowledge of partners' responses on subjects' performance in a vigilance task. Amer. Psychologist, 1961, 16, 451. (Abstract)
5.
HarlestonB. W.EydeL.RobyT. B.Organiration and group vigilance. Amer. Psychologist, 1959, 14, 381. (Abstract)
6.
KrendelE. S.WodinskyJ.Visual search in an unstructured visual field. USAF, Cambridge Research Center Report, 1959, No. 59-51.
7.
MackworthN. H.Researches on the measurement of human performance. Med. Res. Council Spec. Report Ser., 1950, No. 268.
8.
NicelyP. E.MillerG. A.Some effects of unequal spatial distribution on the detectability of radar targets. J. exp. Psychol., 1957, 53, 195–198.
