COVID-19 masks increase the influence of face recognition algorithm decisions on human decisions in unfamiliar face matching.

Face masks, recently adopted to reduce the spread of COVID-19, have had the unintended consequence of increasing the difficulty of face recognition. In security applications, face recognition algorithms are used to identify individuals and present results for human review. This combination of human and algorithm capabilities, known as human-algorithm teaming, is intended to improve total system performance. However, prior work has shown that human judgments of face pair similarity-confidence can be biased by an algorithm's decision even in the case of an error by that algorithm. This can reduce team effectiveness, particularly for difficult face pairs. We conducted two studies to examine whether face masks, now routinely present in security applications, impact the degree to which this cognitive bias is experienced by humans. We first compared the influence of algorithm's decisions on human similarity-confidence ratings in the presence and absence of face masks and found that face masks more than doubled the influence of algorithm decisions on human similarity-confidence ratings. We then investigated if this increase in cognitive bias was dependent on perceived algorithm accuracy by also presenting algorithm accuracy rates in the presence of face masks. We found that making humans aware of the potential for algorithm errors mitigated the increase in cognitive bias due to face masks. Our findings suggest that humans reviewing face recognition algorithm decisions should be made aware of the potential for algorithm errors to improve human-algorithm team performance.

Evaluating spatial accessibility to COVID-19 vaccine resources in diversely populated counties in the United States.

This study examines the accessibility to COVID-19 vaccination resources in two counties surrounding Newark, NJ in the New York Metropolitan Area, United States. The study area represents diverse population makeups. COVID-19 vaccines were made available by different types of vaccination sites including county mass vaccination sites, medical facilities and pharmacies, and a FEMA community vaccination center in spring 2021. We used the two-step floating catchment area method to measure accessibility and calculated the average accessibility scores of different population groups. We examined the patterns and tested the significance of the differences in accessibility across population groups. The results showed clear spatial heterogeneity in the accessibility to vaccine resources with the existing infrastructure (medical/pharmacy vaccine sites). Accessibility patterns changed with the introduction of county mass sites and the FEMA community site. The county mass vaccination sites in one county greatly increased accessibilities for populations of minority and poverty. The FEMA community site in the other county accomplished the same. Both the local health department and the federal government played an important role in mitigating pre-existing inequalities during the vaccination campaign. Our study shows that social determinants of health need to be addressed and taken into explicit consideration when planning resource distribution during the pandemic.

Detecting and Quantifying Mind Wandering during Simulated Driving.

Mind wandering is a pervasive threat to transportation safety, potentially accounting for a substantial number of crashes and fatalities. In the current study, mind wandering was induced through completion of the same task for 5 days, consisting of a 20-min monotonous freeway-driving scenario, a cognitive depletion task, and a repetition of the 20-min driving scenario driven in the reverse direction. Participants were periodically probed with auditory tones to self-report whether they were mind wandering or focused on the driving task. Self-reported mind wandering frequency was high, and did not statistically change over days of participation. For measures of driving performance, participant labeled periods of mind wandering were associated with reduced speed and reduced lane variability, in comparison to periods of on task performance. For measures of electrophysiology, periods of mind wandering were associated with increased power in the alpha band of the electroencephalogram (EEG), as well as a reduction in the magnitude of the P3a component of the event related potential (ERP) in response to the auditory probe. Results support that mind wandering has an impact on driving performance and the associated change in driver's attentional state is detectable in underlying brain physiology. Further, results suggest that detecting the internal cognitive state of humans is possible in a continuous task such as automobile driving. Identifying periods of likely mind wandering could serve as a useful research tool for assessment of driver attention, and could potentially lead to future in-vehicle safety countermeasures.

Multiple interpretations of long-term working memory theory: Reply to Delaney and Ericsson (2016).

This reply is in response to Delaney and Ericsson (2016), who argue that the results of our recent research (Foroughi, Werner, Barragán, & Boehm-Davis, 2015) can be explained by Ericsson and Kintsch's (1995) long-term working memory (LTWM) theory. Our original work was designed to test the prediction made by LTWM theory that interruptions of up to 30 s in duration would not disrupt reading performance. We conducted the work following the method and outcome measures recommended by Ericsson and Kintsch (1995). Our data were clear: interruptions disrupted reading comprehension. We believe that these data do not support predictions made by LTWM theory. Although we appreciate Delaney and Ericsson's (2016) comments, we are unsure how best to move forward because it appears that some of their comments are not consistent with the published work on LTWM theory. Because of the inconsistent and contradictory claims surrounding LTWM theory, the theory does not appear to be falsifiable, or is in danger of becoming unfalsifiable. Creating and testing theory is vital for the advancement of psychological science, but it appears that testing predictions made by LTWM would be very difficult, if not impossible, given the fluid state of the theory. (PsycINFO Database Record

Validation of the Attention-Related Driving Errors Scale (ARDES) in an English-Speaking Sample.

OBJECTIVE: The goal for this study was to develop an English translation of the Attention-Related Driving Errors Scale (ARDES-US) and to determine its potential relationship with driver history and other demographic variables. BACKGROUND: Individual differences in performance on vigilance and cognitive tasks are well documented, but less is known about susceptibility to attention-related errors while driving. The ARDES has been developed and administered in both Spanish and Chinese but to our knowledge has never been administered or examined in an English-speaking population. METHOD: Two hundred ninety-six English-speaking individuals completed a series of self-report measures, including the ARDES-US, Attention-Related Cognitive Errors Scale, Mindful Attention Awareness Scale, and Cognitive Failures Questionnaire. RESULTS: A confirmatory factor analysis using maximum-likelihood estimates with robust standard errors revealed results largely consistent with previous versions of the ARDES, namely, the ARDES-Spain and ARDES-Argentina. Additionally, a number of new results emerged. Specifically, women, drivers who received traffic tickets within the previous 2 years, and those with a lower level of education all had a greater propensity toward self-reported driver inattention as measured by the ARDES-US. Further analyses revealed that these findings were independent of age, years of driving experience, and driving frequency. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that the ARDES-US is a valid and reliable measure of driver inattention with an English-speaking American sample. APPLICATION: Potential applications of the ARDES-US include identifying individuals who are at greater risk of attention-related errors while driving and suggesting individually tailored training and safety countermeasures.

Interruptions disrupt reading comprehension.

Previous research suggests that being interrupted while reading a text does not disrupt the later recognition or recall of information from that text. This research is used as support for Ericsson and Kintsch's (1995) long-term working memory (LT-WM) theory, which posits that disruptions while reading (e.g., interruptions) do not impair subsequent text comprehension. However, to fully comprehend a text, individuals may need to do more than recognize or recall information that has been presented in the text at a later time. Reading comprehension often requires individuals to connect and synthesize information across a text (e.g., successfully identifying complex topics such as themes and tones) and not just make a familiarity-based decision (i.e., recognition). The goal for this study was to determine whether interruptions while reading disrupt reading comprehension when the questions assessing comprehension require participants to connect and synthesize information across the passage. In Experiment 1, interruptions disrupted reading comprehension. In Experiment 2, interruptions disrupted reading comprehension but not recognition of information from the text. In Experiment 3, the addition of a 15-s time-out prior to the interruption successfully removed these negative effects. These data suggest that the time it takes to process the information needed to successfully comprehend text when reading is greater than that required for recognition. Any interference (e.g., an interruption) that occurs during the comprehension process may disrupt reading comprehension. This evidence supports the need for transient activation of information in working memory for successful text comprehension and does not support LT-WM theory.