RESUMEN
Two models of recently reported high workload associated with vigilance tasks are the direct-cost and indirect-cost views. The former attributes high workload to the need for continuous observation in discriminating signals from neutral events; the latter attributes it to efforts to combat the boredom associated with monotonous vigilance tasks. These opposing views were tested by providing observers with reliable cueing, which rendered observation necessary only when low-probability critical signals were imminent, or with knowledge of results (KR) regarding performance efficiency. On the basis of cue and KR differences in elicited observation activity and motivational value, the direct-cost model led to the anticipation that cueing would result in a high-boredom, low-workload profile and a greater reduction in workload than KR. The indirect-cost model led to the prediction that cueing would result in a high-boredom, high-workload profile and a lesser reduction in workload than KR. The results clearly supported the direct-cost view that the workload of vigilance is task-induced. Consequently, efforts to combat high workload in complex automated systems requiring substantial monitoring by operators should focus specifically upon task-related determinants.
Asunto(s)
Atención , Tedio , Señales (Psicología) , Análisis y Desempeño de Tareas , Carga de Trabajo , Estimulación Acústica , Adolescente , Adulto , Aeronaves , Análisis de Varianza , Aviación , Terminales de Computador , Costos y Análisis de Costo , Femenino , Humanos , Conocimiento Psicológico de los Resultados , Masculino , Modelos Teóricos , Programas Informáticos , Carga de Trabajo/economíaRESUMEN
Eighteen adults who had suffered a very severe closed head-injury more than 18 months previously and required long-term rehabilitative support were compared with a closely matched control group. Unlike previous studies, which have reported negative personality change involving an increase in aversive behaviour, our behavioural observation data suggest that a global reduction in behavioural productivity, or negative symptomatology, characterizes social interaction by this group. This resulted in their being judged less socially skilled, less likeable and less interesting, and thus less reinforcing to interact with. Speed of information processing was specifically impaired for the closed head-injury group, although this did not correlate with global behavioural ratings of social interaction behaviour. It is suggested that low behavioural productivity may be associated with family burden, and that the low quantity of social interaction experienced by severely head-injured adults may reflect the unreinforcing nature of their interactions.
