Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33835271›Full record

ArticleCognitive research: principles and implications2021

Real-time prediction of short-timescale fluctuations in cognitive workload.

Udo Boehm, Dora Matzke, Matthew Gretton, Spencer Castro, Joel Cooper, Michael Skinner, David Strayer, Andrew Heathcote

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cognitive research: principles and implications, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Udo BoehmDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 15906, 1001 NK, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. u.bohm@uva.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8677-0721
Dora MatzkeDepartment of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, PO Box 15906, 1001 NK, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Matthew GrettonDepartment of Psychology, University of Tasmania, Sandy Bay, Australia.
Spencer CastroDepartment of Psychology, University of Utah, Utah, USA.
Joel CooperDepartment of Psychology, University of Utah, Utah, USA.
Michael SkinnerAerospace Division, Defence Science and Technology Group, Melbourne, Australia.
David StrayerDepartment of Psychology, University of Utah, Utah, USA.
Andrew HeathcoteDepartment of Psychology, University of Tasmania, Sandy Bay, Australia.
University of Utah · USUniversity of Tasmania · AUAmsterdam University of Applied Sciences · NLDefence Science and Technology Group · AUUniversity of Amsterdam · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Human operators often experience large fluctuations in cognitive workload over seconds timescales that can lead to sub-optimal performance, ranging from overload to neglect. Adaptive automation could potentially address this issue, but to do so it needs to be aware of real-time changes in operators' spare cognitive capacity, so it can provide help in times of peak demand and take advantage of troughs to elicit operator engagement. However, it is unclear whether rapid changes in task demands are reflected in similarly rapid fluctuations in spare capacity, and if so what aspects of responses to those demands are predictive of the current level of spare capacity. We used the ISO standard detection response task (DRT) to measure cognitive workload approximately every 4 s in a demanding task requiring monitoring and refueling of a fleet of simulated unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). We showed that the DRT provided a valid measure that can detect differences in workload due to changes in the number of UAVs. We used cross-validation to assess whether measures related to task performance immediately preceding the DRT could predict detection performance as a proxy for cognitive workload. Although the simple occurrence of task events had weak predictive ability, composite measures that tapped operators' situational awareness with respect to fuel levels were much more effective. We conclude that cognitive workload does vary rapidly as a function of recent task events, and that real-time predictive models of operators' cognitive workload provide a potential avenue for automation to adapt without an ongoing need for intrusive workload measurements.

Indexed as

Task Performance and AnalysisWorkloadAdvance DirectivesAutomationAwarenessHumansCognitive workloadCross-validationDetection response taskHuman-automation teamingWorkload prediction

Identifiers

PMID33835271
PMCPMC8035388
OpenAlexW3140358070

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.