ArticleScientific reports2026
Characterizing alterations in attention networks under high mental workload.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
With the rapid development of modern society, occupational populations commonly face work states characterized by high mental workload (HMW). HMW can rapidly mobilize and deplete an individual's cognitive resources within a short timeframe. As attention constitutes a fundamental cognitive quality, it is inevitably impacted by HMW, leading to issues such as impaired attentional function and decreased task performance. This study aimed to investigate the characteristics of alterations in attention network under HMW. Participants were recruited from a medical university using convenience sampling. The 1-back Stroop (BS) cognitive task was employed to induce an HMW state. The Attention Network Test-Revised (ANT-R) was completed before and after the induction of the HMW to assess attention network behavior. Eye tracking was assessed using an eye tracker, and subjective assessment was conducted using a visual analog scale (VAS). Statistical analysis was performed using a paired t-test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Subjective VAS ratings showed significant increases in mental fatigue (MF), mental effort (ME), mental stress (MS), boredom, and mind wandering (MW) following HMW induction compared to baseline. Behavioral results showed that, compared with before HMW state induction, there were significant differences in alert (sustained attention for maintaining arousal), moving+engaging (selective attention for adjusting and focusing on valid stimuli), flanker conflict (directional conflict between target stimuli and surrounding distracting stimuli) and location conflict (directional conflict between target stimuli and stimulus locations) changes. Alert efficiency values decreased significantly, while moving+engaging, flanker and location conflict values increased significantly. No significant differences were observed in the number of correct trials. Eye tracking results showed that, compared with the state before HMW induction, there were significant differences in average saccade duration and blink count, with a notable increase in both. The ANT-R demonstrates utility both as an experimental paradigm for assessing attention networks and as a behavioral indicator for evaluating HMW. Under the HMW state, significant changes were observed in a subset of behavioral, subjective rating scale, and eye-tracking indicators related to the attention network. This study validated the effectiveness of the BS cognitive task paradigm in inducing the HMW and provided new experimental evidence for revealing the characteristics of attention network changes in the HMW, laying the foundation for the development of assessment and intervention strategies.
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.