Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34623490›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2022

The effects of real-time performance feedback and performance emphasis on the sustained attention to response task (SART).

Justin M Mensen, Jasmine S Dang, Andrew J Stets, William S Helton

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Justin M MensenGeorge Mason University, 4400 University Dr, Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA. jmensen@gmu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4281-5104
Jasmine S DangGeorge Mason University, 4400 University Dr, Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2375-5978
Andrew J StetsGeorge Mason University, 4400 University Dr, Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7564-8467
William S HeltonGeorge Mason University, 4400 University Dr, Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The sustained attention to response task (SART) has been used for over 20 years to assess participants' response times and inability to withhold to No-Go stimuli (commission errors). While there is debate in the literature regarding what causes commissions errors in the SART, there is agreement the SART is subject to a speed-accuracy trade-off (SATO). Researchers have demonstrated that performance on the SART can be influenced by directive instructions to participants to prioritize either speed or accuracy during the task. In the present study, we investigated whether real-time performance feedback and whether feedback emphasis (emphasizing speed or accuracy) affected participants' response times and accuracy. We found performance feedback per se had no impact on performance, but performance emphasis did affect performance, apparently shifting the SATO. This finding provides further evidence that the commission errors in the SART are not indicative of sustained attention or vigilance as those terms are commonly used in the literature, but more likely assess response strategy and motor control (or lack of motor control). These findings have implications for the psychological assessment literature, as well as applied areas where SART findings have been utilized such as shoot/no-shoot decision making.

Indexed as

Psychomotor PerformanceFeedbackHumansReaction Time

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.