Ss monitored a display consisting of the repetitive presentation of pairs of movements of a bar of light. A neutral background event, for which no overt response was required, was a double deflection of 24 mm. The critical signal for detection was a longer deflection in the second movement within an event. Detection probability was greater for incremental excursions of 33% relative to 8.3% of the base movement. This effect was enhanced twofold when the event rate in which the signals were embedded was 21 as compared to 6 events/min. The results are considered in terms of the elicited observing rate hypothesis proposed by Jerison (1970).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BakerC. H.Further toward a theory of vigilance. In BucknerD. N.McGrathJ. J. (Eds.), Vigilance: A symposium. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963. Pp. 127–170.
2.
BroadbentD. A.Decision and stress. New York: Academic Press, 1971.
3.
ColquhounW. P.The effect of ‘unwanted’ signals on performance in a vigilance task. Ergonomics, 1961, 4, 41–51.
4.
DaviesD. R.TuneG. S.Human vigilance performance. New York: American Elsevier, 1969.
5.
JerisonH. J.Human and animal vigilance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1965, 21, 580–582.
6.
JerisonH. J.Activation and long-term performance. Acta Psychologica, 1967, 27, 373–389.
7.
JerisonH. J.Vigilance, discrimination, and attention. In MostofskyD. I. (Ed.), Attention: Contemporary theory and analysis. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1970. Pp. 127–147.
8.
JerisonH. J.PickettR. M.Vigilance: The importance of the elicited observing rate. Science, 1964, 143, 970–971.
9.
LoebM.AlluisiE. A.Influence of display, task, and organismic variables on indices of monitoring behavior. Acta Psycbologica, 1970, 33, 343–366.
10.
LoebM.BinfordJ. R.Variation in performance on auditory and visual monitoring tasks as a function of signal and stimulus frequencies. Perception & Psychophysics, 1968, 4, 361–367.
11.
MackworthN. H.Researches on the measurement of human performance. H. M. Stationary Office, Medical Research Council Special Report Series 268, 1950. [Reprinted in SiniakoH. W. (Ed.), Selected papers on human factors in the design and use of control systems. New York: Dover, 1961. Pp. 174–331.].
12.
McGrathJ. J.Irrelevant stimulation and vigilance performance. In BucknerD. N.McGrathJ. J. (Eds.), Vigilance: A symposium. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1963. Pp. 3–21.
13.
MooreS. F.GrossS. J.Influence of critical signal regularity, stimulus event matrix, and cognitive style on vigilance performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973, 99, 137–139.
14.
TaubH. A.OsborneF. H.Effects of signal and stimulus rates on vigilance performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1968, 52, 133–138.
15.
WarmJ. S.AlluistE. A.Influence of temporal uncertainty and sensory modality of signals on watchkeeping performance. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1971, 87, 303–308.
