62 human male subjects were tested in this study which involved a unique, numeric-monitoring task including both ready signals and GO NO-GO signals for response in order to verify that increases in signal rate improve performance. These data extend and generalize previous findings to a wider variety of signal conditions and also answer a criticism of previous findings, i.e., that if subjects made a constant number of responses per hour, their percentage signals missed would decline as a function of signal rate. By the unique design of the task, this criticism was refuted and the general conclusions in the extant literature were supported and extended. It was shown that performance improved as a function of number of ready signals (P < .02). Data from this study could be used to support the arousal hypotheses of performance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AdamsJ. A.BoulterL. R.Monitoring of complex visual displays: I. Effects of response complexity and intersignal interval on vigilant behavior when visual load is moderate. U. S. Air Force, Air Force Command and Control Development Division, Technical Note, AFCCDD-TN-60-63, 1960.
2.
BakerC. H.Attention to visual displays during a vigilance task: II. Maintaining the level of vigilance. British Journal of Psychology, 1959, 50, 30–36.
3.
BakerR. A.WareJ. R.SipowiczR. R.Vigilance: A comparison in auditory, visual and combined audio-visual tasks. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1962, 16, 192–198.
4.
BenignusV. A.OttoD. A.KnelsonJ. H.Effect of low-frequency random noises on performance of a numeric monitoring task. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1975, 40, 231–239.
5.
BowenH. M.Vigilance as a function of signal frequency and flash rate. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1964, 18, 333–338.
6.
BowenH. M.WoodheadM. M.Vigilance: The effect of frequency of signals. Medical Research Council on Applied Psychology Research Unit Memo Report, 1956.
7.
BroadbentD. E.GregoryM.Effects of noise and of signal rate upon vigilance analyzed by means of decision theory. Human Factors, 1965, 7, 155–162.
8.
BrowneR. C.Day and night performance of teleprinter switchboard operators. Occupational Psychology, 1949, 23, 121–126.
9.
CorcoranD. W. J.Doubling the rate of signal presentation in vigilance task during sleep deprivation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1963, 47, 412–415.
10.
DeeseJ.Some problems in the theory of vigilance. Psychological Review, 1955, 62, 359–368.
11.
DeeseJ.OrmondE.Studies of detectability during continuous visual search. Wright Air Development Center, Technical Reports, 1953, 53–58.
12.
DruryC. G.AddisonJ. L.An industrial study of the effects of feedback and fault density on inspection performance. Ergonomics, 1973, 16, 159–169.
13.
EasonR. G.BeardshallA.JaffeS.Performance and physiological indicants of activation in a vigilance situation. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1965, 20, 3–13.
14.
FrankmanJ. P.AdamsJ. A.Theories of vigilance. Psychological Bulletin, 1962, 59, 257–272.
15.
GuralnickM. J.Effects of event rate and signal difficulty on observing responses and detection measures in vigilance. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1973, 99, 261–265.
16.
HawkesG. R.LoebM.Vigilance for cutaneous and auditory stimuli as a function of intersignal interval and signal strength. Journal of Psychology, 1962, 53, 211–218.
17.
HowellW. C.JohnstonW. A.GoldsteinI. L.Complex monitoring and its relation to the classical problem of vigilance. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1966, 1, 129–150.
18.
JenkinsH. M.Performance on a visual monitoring task as a function of the rate at which signals occur. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Lincoln Laboratory, Technical Report No. 7, 1953.
19.
JenkinsH. M.The effect of signal rate on performance in visual monitoring. American Journal of Psychology, 1958, 71, 647–661.
20.
JerisonH. J.Experiments on vigilance: The empirical model for human vigilance. Wright Air Development Center, Technical Reports, 1959, 58–526.
21.
KappaufW. E.PoweW. E.Performance decrement on an audiovisual checking task. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1959, 57, 49–56.
22.
LevineJ. M.RomashkoT.FleishmanE. A.Evaluation of an abilities classification system for integrating and generalizing human performance research findings: An application to vigilance tasks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1973, 58, 149–157.
23.
LoebM.BinfordJ. R.Variation in performance on auditory and visual monitoring tasks as a function of signal and stimulus frequencies. Perception and Psychophysics, 1968, 4, 361–367.
24.
MackworthJ. F.TaylorM. M.The d’ measure of signal detectability in vigilancelike situations. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 1963, 17, 302–325.
25.
MartzR. L.Signal presentation rate, auditory threshold, and group vigilance. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1966, 23, 463–469.
26.
McDonaldR. D.BurnsS. B.Visual vigilance and brain damage: An empirical study. Journal of Neurological Neurosurgical Psychiatry, 1964, 27, 206–209.
27.
NicelyP. E.MillerG. A.Some effects of unequal spatial distribution on the detectability of radar targets. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 1957, 53, 195–198.
28.
PollackI.KnaffP. R.Effect of rate of target presentation on target detection probability. American Psychologist, 1958, 13, 414.
29.
PopeL. T.A study of signal variables and level of alertness in visual and auditory vigilance. Dissertation Abstracts, 1962, 22, 2480.
30.
SmithR. P.WarmJ. S.AlluisiE. A.Effects of temporal uncertainty on watch keeping performance. Perception and Psychophysics, 1966, 1, 293–299.
SternR. M.Performance and physiological arousal during two vigilance tasks varying in signal presentation rate. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1966, 23, 691–700.
33.
StrohC. M.Vigilance: The problem of sustained attention. New York: Pergamon, 1971.
34.
TaubH. A.OsborneF. H.Effects of signal and stimulus rates on vigilance performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1968, 52, 133–138.
35.
WarnerD. W.HeimstraN. W.Target-detection performance as a function of noise intensity and task difficulty. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1973, 36, 439–442.
36.
WienerE. L.Knowledge of results and signal rate in monitoring: A transfer of training approach. Journal of Applied Psychology, 1963, 47, 214–222.
37.
WilkinsonR. T.Artificial “signals” as an aid to an inspection task. Ergonomics1964, 7, 63–72.
38.
YorkC.Behavioral efficiency in a visual monitoring task as a function of signal rate and observer age. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1962, 15, 404.
