Inconsistent findings on coupled illumination, accumulated noise and task complexity effects on cognitive-motor performance asked for a more comprehensive analysis by focusing on performance dynamics.
OBJECTIVE:
The aim was to investigate the effects of illumination, accumulated noise, and task complexity on several average and non-average temporal indicators.
METHODS:
The research was designed as a mixed factorial quasi-experiment including 83 students of transport (n = 42) and psychology (n = 41) at the University of Zagreb. Participants were assigned to designated experimental conditions defined by illumination (40, 280, 3400 lx), and accumulated noise (0% and 50% of the daily exposure limit) levels and all performed 2- and 8-choice reaction time tests.
RESULTS:
The findings showed negative effects of accumulated noise and task complexity on all performance indicators, while the effect of illumination reached significance only for maximal speed. Significant Illumination x Task complexity and Illumination x Accumulated noise effects were obtained for average efficiency, while significant Accumulated noise x Task complexity effect was observed for average efficiency and maximal speed.
CONCLUSIONS:
Various indicators of performance dynamics were diversely affected by external factors, thereby suggesting the effects’ mechanisms, and accentuating different guidelines for design of workplaces that include these environmental stressors.
IvosevićJ, BucakT, AndrasiP. Effects of interior aircraft noise on pilot performance, Appl acoust2018;139:8–13.
2.
LindvallJ, VastfjallD, The effect of interior aircraft noise on pilot performance, Percept Mot Skills: Perception2013;116(2):1–4.
3.
IvoševićJ, SumporD, UgrinaI, editors. Permanent threshold shift analysis of diesel traction engine drivers. Proceedings of the 7th Forum Acusticum; 2014; Krakow, Poland. Poland: Polish Acoustical Society.
4.
TsutsumiH, HodaY, TanabeS, Effect of car cabin environment on driver’s comfort and fatigue, SAE Int J Passeng Cars - Mech Syst2007;116(6):335–46.
5.
EcheverriaD, BarnesV, BittnerA, DurbinN, Fawcett-LongJ, MooreC, et al., The impacts of environmental conditions on human performance: A critical review of the literature, NUREG1994;2:1–257.
6.
SmithAP, A review of the effects of noise on human performance, Scand J Psychol1989;30:185–206.
7.
SzalmaJL, HancockPA, Noise effects on human performance: A meta-analytic synthesis, Psychol Bull. 2011;137(4):682–707.
8.
AlimohammadiI, ZokaeiM, SandrockS ,The effect of road traffic noise on reaction time, Health Promot Perspect2015;5(3):207–14.
9.
ChraifM, The effects of radio noise in multiple time reaction tasks for young students, Procedia Soc2012;33:1057–62.
10.
TrimmelM, PoelzlG, Impact of background noise on reaction time and brain DC potential changes of VDT-based spatial attention, Ergonomics2006;49(2):202–8.
JensenARClocking the mind: Mental chronometry and individual differences. Oxford:Elsevier Ltd; 2006.
13.
GreenM, How long does it take to stop? Methodological analysis of driver perception-brake times, Transp Hum Factors2000;2(3):195–216.
14.
GrandjeanEErgonomics in computerized offices. London: CRC Press; 1986.
15.
DudekB, Marszal-WišniewskaM, Merecz-KotD, SulkowskiW, BortkiewiczA, Effects of noise on cognitive processes of individuals in a laboratory experiment, Pol J Occup Med Environ Health1991;4(3):269–79.
16.
GretherWF Noise and human performance. Dayton: Aerospace Medical Research Laboratory; 1971.
17.
NagarD, PandeyJ, Affect and performance as s function of crowding and noise, J App Soc Psychol1987;17(2):147–57.
18.
SmoldersKCHJ, de KortYA, Bright light and mental fatigue: Effects on alertness, vitality, performance and physiological arousal, J Environ Psychol2014;39:77–91.
19.
MacDonaldSWS, HultschDF, DixonRA, Performance Variability Is Related to Change in Cognition: Evidence From the Victoria Longitudinal Study, Psychol Aging2003;18(3):510–23.
20.
SalthouseTA, Aging and measures of processing speed, Biol Psychol2000;54:35–54.
21.
SmithA, An update on noise and performance: Comment on Szalma and Hancock Psychol Bulletin2012;138(6):1262–8.
22.
žebecMS, BudimirS, MerkašM, SzirovicaL, živičnjakM,. Sex-specific age-related changes of information processing rate indicators during childhood and adolescence, Collegium Antropologicum2014;38(2):397–408.
23.
živičnjakM, žebecMS, FrankeD, FillerG, SzirovicaL, HaffnerD, et al., Analysis of cognitive and motor functioning during pubertal development: A new approach, J Physiol Antrop App Hum Sci2001;20(2):111–8.
24.
SchubertAL, A meta-analysis of the worst performance rule, Intelligence2019;73:88–100.
25.
CoyleTR, A review of the worst performance rule: Evidence, theory, and alternative hypotheses, Intelligence2003;31:567–87.
26.
BokerSM, NesselroadeJR, A Method for Modeling the Intrinsic Dynamics of Intraindividual Variability: Recovering the Parameters of Simulated Oscillators in Multi-Wave Panel DataMultivar Behav Res. 2002;37(1):127–60.
27.
DykiertD, DerG, StarrJM, DearyIJ, Age Differences in Intra-Individual Variability in Simple and Choice Reaction Time: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis, PLoS ONE2012;7(10):1–23.
28.
MyersonJ, RobertsonS, HaleS, Aging and intraindividual variability in performance: analyses of response time distributions, J Exp Anal Behav2007;88(3):319–37.
29.
RadićJ, LjutićD, RadićM, KovacićV, Dodig-ĆurkovićK, Sain M, Kidney Transplantation Improves Cognitive and Psychomotor Functions in Adult Hemodialysis Patients, Am J Nephrol2011;34:399–406.
30.
SchubertAL, A meta-analysis of the worst performance rule, Intelligence2019;73:88–100.
31.
SteinbornMB, FlehmingHC, WesthoffK, LangnerR, Differential effects of prolonged work on performance measures in self-paced speed tests, Adv Cogn Psychol2009;5:105–13.
32.
DrenovacM Kronometrija dinamike mentalnog procesiranja. Osijek: Filozofski fakultet Sveučilišta J. J Strossmayera; 2009.
33.
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Occupational noise exposure: Criteria for a recommended standard. US: Department of Health and Human Services; 1998.
34.
TukeyJWExploratory data analysis. Boston: AddisonWesley Inc; 1977.
35.
DanthiirV, WilhelmO, SchulzeR, RobertsRD, Factor structure and validity of paper-and-pencil measures of mental speed: Evidence for a higher-order model, Intelligence2005;33:491–514.
36.
KlappST Reaction time analysis of central motor control. In: N Zelaznik, editor. Advances in motor learning and control. Champaign: Human Kinetics; 1996. pp. 13-36.
37.
LaszloJI, LiveseyJP, Task complexity, accuracy and reaction time, J Mot Behav1977;9(2):171–7.
38.
NgANY, ChanAHS Finger response times to visual, auditory and tactile modality stimuli. Hong Kong: Newswood Limited; 2012.
39.
PinsD, BonnetC, On the relation between stimulus intensity and processing time: Pieron’s law and choice reaction time, Percept Psychophys1996;58(3):390–400.
40.
HockeyRJ, Compensatory control in the regulation of human performance under stress and high workload: A cognitive energetical framework, Biol Psychol.1997;45(1-3):73–93.
41.
StaalMA Stress, cognition and human performance: A literature review and conceptual framework. Moffet Field: Ames Research Center; 2004.
42.
ZebecMS, CrnkoI, PalavraV, SumporD, Pokazatelji dinamike funkcioniranja selektivne pažnje hrvatskih strojovod njihove dobne razlike, Sigurnost.2017;59(4):331–54.
43.
CortisC, PesceC, CaprancaL, Inter-limb coordination dynamics: Effects of visual constraints and age, Kinesiology2018;50(1):133–9.
44.
GasawayDC. Noise levels in cockpits of aircraft during normal cruise and considerations of auditory risk, Aviat Space Environ Med1978;57(2):103–12.
45.
KiskuGC, BhargavaSK, Assessment of noise level of a medium scale thermal power plant, Indian J Occup Environ Med2006;10:133–9.
46.
LindgrenT, WieslanderG, DammströmBG, NorbackD, Hearing status among commercial pilots in a Swedish airline company, Int J Audio2008;47(8):515–9.
47.
MullerR, SchneiderJ, Noise exposure and auditory thresholds of German airline pilots: a cross-sectional study, BMJ Open2017;7:1–8.
