Effects of state motivation in overload and underload vigilance task scenarios.

Vigilance, or sustained attention, is the ability to maintain attention for prolonged periods of time. Interestingly, to date, few studies on vigilance have focused on the role of state motivation in sustaining attention. To address this disparity in the literature, the present study examined the effect of two types of state motivation on vigilance performance across task types (cognitive or sensory) and across the number of displays (one, two, or four). A sample of 105 participants completed a 24-min overload or underload vigilance task in a research laboratory. Participants were randomly assigned to either a cognitive or sensory vigilance task, and were randomly assigned to monitor one, two, or four displays for target stimuli. The results indicated that intrinsic state motivation predicted correct detection performance and state success motivation predicted sensitivity, but not false alarm performance, response bias, or global workload. We conclude with a discussion of the theoretical and practical applications of this research.

Evaluative social presence can improve vigilance performance, but vigilance is still hard work and is stressful.

Vigilance is the ability to sustain attention over a period of time. Previous research has indicated that vigilance tasks are hard work and are stressful for human operators. Performance tends to decline with time on task, and workload and stress typically increase during the course of the vigil. Methods that could be used to overcome the adverse effects of vigilance (i.e., stress, workload, poor performance) includes social facilitation factors, such as performing the task while under observation. Thus, the present experiments examined the effects of multiple forms of social facilitation on vigilance, as well as the stress and workload associated with performing the task. Over 2 experiments, 284 participants completed a 24-min cognitive vigilance task. The results indicated that evaluative-based forms of social presence (i.e., direct monitoring, electronic performance monitoring) were associated with improved detection performance. The mere social presence of a monitor did not significantly influence vigilance performance. The results also demonstrated that social facilitation (in any form) did not impose additional stress or workload on the observers. These novel results have both important practical and theoretical implications for both vigilance performance and social facilitation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

Task Engagement and the Vigilance Decrement Revisited: Expanding Upon the Work of Joel S. Warm Using a Semantic Vigilance Paradigm.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of the present study is twofold: (1) demonstrate the importance of measuring and understanding the relationship between task engagement and vigilance performance, and (2) celebrate the work of Joel S. Warm and expand upon his previous research in two semantic vigilance paradigms. BACKGROUND: The importance of measuring task engagement in cognitive and sensory vigilance tasks has been well documented. But to date, our understanding of the effects of task engagement on semantic vigilance performance is limited. METHOD: Seventy-three participants completed either a standard semantic vigilance task or a lure semantic vigilance task. Participants also completed subjective measures of workload and stress. RESULTS: The results indicated that changes in task engagement are associated with correct detection performance. Changes in task engagement may be related to individual differences in the distress associated with performing semantic vigilance tasks. CONCLUSION: In line with the work of Warm and his colleagues (Dember, Warm, Bowers, & Lanzetta, 1984), participants who reported increased task engagement after the vigil outperformed their peers who noted decreased task engagement upon conclusion of the task. Participants reporting increases in engagement with the semantic vigilance tasks also reported significantly greater distress pretask, but not posttask. Instead, increases in postvigil distress were driven by the task to which participants were assigned, not task engagement. APPLICATION: The present study has several implications for applied settings that involve long duration semantic processing or semantic target identification. Such real-world tasks include aviation, cyber threat detection and analysis, driving, and reading.

Where is my mind? Examining mind-wandering and vigilance performance.

Vigilance is the ability to sustain attention to information for prolonged periods of time, particularly in environments where critical signals may be rare. Recent research in the domain of mind-wandering has suggested that processes associated with mind-wandering may underpin the typical decline in vigilance task performance. Current methods for measuring mind-wandering either disrupt vigils by asking probe questions throughout the task, or, require observers to reflect on how much mind-wandering occurred during the task upon conclusion of the vigil. Across three experimental studies, we treat mind-wandering as an individual difference, which was measured pre- and post-vigil. We argue this technique is a more holistic representation of mind-wandering and is less intrusive than probe measures, which serve to disrupt the vigil. The results of our first experiment challenge previous results in the literature: higher rates of mind-wandering were associated with improved correct detection performance. Interestingly, the second experiment suggests that increases in mind-wandering were not linked to vigilance performance deficits. However, significant differences in global workload emerged in the second experiment, implying individuals low in mind-wandering report greater workload. In a third experiment, wherein we manipulated event rate, mind-wandering typology had no significant effect on vigilance performance. We conclude with a discussion of the relevance of individual differences in mind-wandering in vigilance research considering the present findings.

The Effects of Event Rate on a Cognitive Vigilance Task.

OBJECTIVE: The present experiment sought to examine the effects of event rate on a cognitive vigilance task. BACKGROUND: Vigilance, or the ability to sustain attention, is an integral component of human factors research. Vigilance task difficulty has previously been manipulated through increasing event rate. However, most research in this paradigm has utilized a sensory-based task, whereas little work has focused on these effects in relation to a cognitive-based task. METHOD: In sum, 84 participants completed a cognitive vigilance task that contained either 24 events per minute (low event rate condition) or 40 events per minute (high event rate condition). Performance was measured through the proportion of hits, false alarms, mean response time, and signal detection analyses (i.e., sensitivity and response bias). Additionally, measures of perceived workload and stress were collected. RESULTS: The results indicated that event rate significantly affected performance, such that participants who completed the low event rate task achieved significantly better performance in terms of correction detections and false alarms. Furthermore, the cognitive vigil utilized in the present study produced performance decrements comparable to traditional sensory vigilance tasks. CONCLUSION: Event rate affects cognitive vigilance tasks in a similar manner as traditional sensory vigilance tasks, such that a direct relation between performance and level of event rate was established. APPLICATION: Cognitive researchers wishing to manipulate task difficulty in their experiments may use event rate presentation as one avenue to achieve this result.

Can vigilance tasks be administered online? A replication and discussion.

Recently, experimental studies of vigilance have been deployed using online data collection methods. This data collection strategy is not new to the psychological sciences, but it is relatively new to basic research assessing vigilance performance, as studies in this area of research tend to collect data in the laboratory or in the field. The present study partially replicated the results of a newly developed online vigilance task (Thomson, Besner, & Smilek, 2016). A sample of 130 participants completed the semantic vigilance task created by Thomson et al. (2016) in a research laboratory setting. The present results replicated Thomson et al. (2016) when nonparametric and corrected signal detection measures were used. We suggest that some vigilance tasks typically performed in the laboratory could be administered online. However, we encourage researchers to consider the following factors prior to studying vigilance performance online: (a) the type of vigilance task, (b) the length of the vigilance task, and (c) the signal detection indices most appropriate for their research. It is quite possible that some analyses may yield significant results, whereas other signal detection measures may not (i.e., parametric indices vs. nonparametric indices vs. "corrected" indices) and this point is discussed further in our article. (PsycINFO Database Record

Independent Coactors May Improve Performance and Lower Workload: Viewing Vigilance Under Social Facilitation.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to examine the effects of an independent coactor on vigilance task performance. It was hypothesized that the presence of an independent coactor would improve performance in terms of the proportion of false alarms while also increasing perceived workload and stress. BACKGROUND: Vigilance, or the ability to maintain attention for extended periods, is of great interest to human factors psychologists. Substantial work has focused on improving vigilance task performance, typically through motivational interventions. Of interest to vigilance researchers is the application of social facilitation as a means of enhancing vigilance. Social facilitation seeks to explain how social presence may improve performance. METHOD: A total of 100 participants completed a 24-min vigil either alone or in the presence of an independent (confederate) coactor. Participants completed measures of perceived workload and stress. RESULTS: The results indicated that performance (i.e., proportion of false alarms) was improved for those who completed the vigil in the presence of an independent coactor. Interestingly, perceived workload was actually lower for those who completed the vigil in the presence of an independent coactor, although perceived stress was not affected by the manipulation. CONCLUSION: Authors of future research should extend these findings to other forms of social facilitation and examine vigilance task performance in social contexts in order to determine the utility of social presence for improving vigilance. APPLICATION: The use of coactors may be an avenue for organizations to consider utilizing to improve performance because of its relative cost-effectiveness and easy implementation.

Ceci n'est pas un walrus: lexical processing in vigilance performance.

Vigilance, or the ability to sustain attention for extended periods of time, has traditionally been examined using a myriad of symbolic, cognitive, and sensory tasks. However, the current literature indicates a relative lack of empirical investigation on vigilance performance involving lexical processing. To address this gap in the literature, the present study examined the effect of stimulus meaning on vigilance performance (i.e., lure effects). A sample of 126 observers completed a 12-min lexical vigilance task in a research laboratory. Observers were randomly assigned to a standard task (targets and neutral events only) or a lure task (lures, targets, and neutral events presented), wherein lures were stimuli that were categorically similar to target stimuli. A novel analytical approach was utilized to examine the results; the lure groups were divided based on false alarm performance post hoc. Groups were further divided to demonstrate that the presence of lure stimuli significantly affects the decision-making criteria used to assess the performance of lexical vigilance tasks. We also discuss the effect of lure stimuli on measures related to signal detection theory (e.g., sensitivity and response bias).

A critical examination of the research and theoretical underpinnings discussed in Thomson, Besner, and Smilek (2016).

Thomson, Besner, and Smilek (2016) propose that performance decrements associated with sustained attention are not consistently the result of a decline in perceptual sensitivity. Thomson et al. (2016) present empirical evidence using a novel, nontraditional vigilance task to support their assumptions. However, in the present rebuttal, we argue that the authors have not only have misinterpreted previous research in sustained attention, but also have misapplied those interpretations to their study. Thomson et al. have also neglected key elements of the literature in their argument, including research on expectancy theory and individual differences on vigilance performance. Furthermore, Thomson and colleagues implement an experimental paradigm that is not appropriate for evaluating sensitivity and bias changes in vigilance tasks. Finally, their analyses do not capture the manner in which changes in response bias and sensitivity can manifest in signal detection theory. We discuss the theoretical and experimental issues contained in Thomson et al. (2016) and propose suggestions for future vigilance research in this area. (PsycINFO Database Record