ArticlePloS one2019
Rapid serial blinks: An index of temporally increased cognitive load.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Associations Between Eye-Movement Patterns, Pupil Dynamics, and the Interpretation of a Single Mixed-Dentition Panoramic Radiograph Among Dental Students: An Exploratory Eye-Tracking Study.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Measuring Mental Effort in Real Time Using Pupillometry.Journal of eye movement research · 2025Article
- Automated Analysis Pipeline for Extracting Saccade, Pupil, and Blink Parameters Using Video-Based Eye Tracking.Vision (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, natural viewing settings with video presentation have been used in neurological and psychological experiments. However, the experienced cognitive load may differ among participants. In this study, we show that rapid serial blinks (RSB) can indicate temporally increased cognitive load with high temporal resolution. We proposed a method to create a personal criterion for respective participants by using empirical blink intervals. When we focused on more than four serial blinks (i.e., three inter-blink intervals), an increased number of RSB detect participants who felt hard to understanding, indicating a poor understanding of the subject matter. By contrast, a constant criterion across participants used in previous study could not detect participant's understanding. These results suggest that individual differences in cognitive trait of each participant may skew the results of experiments. To avoid biases, we recommend researchers to perform an operational check on individually different temporally increased cognitive loads among experimental groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.