ArticleBMC psychology2026
Sensory processing sensitivity predicts pilot decision time via indecisiveness: evidence from flight simulation and fNIRS.
Article in BMC psychology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Decision-Making Styles Shaping College Students' Sports and Health Consumption Preferences: Behavioral and Neurological Evidence.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundTimely decision-making in aviation emergencies (e.g., engine failure and runway excursion) is a critical human factor for flight safety. However, pilots vary widely in their ability to make rapid, accurate decisions under stress. Identifying individual traits and neural mechanisms underlying decision delay is essential for risk mitigation and pilot training.
methodsFifty-one male cadet pilots were recruited and classified into high- and low-sensory processing sensitivity (SPS) groups based on their Highly Sensitive Person Scale (HSPS) scores. All participants completed simulated landing tasks under two risk conditions: a high-risk scenario (engine failure plus wind shear) and a low-risk scenario (wind shear only). The behavioural decision time, overall flight performance, and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC; Brodmann area 9) activation were assessed using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS). Statistical analyses included mixed-design analyses of variance (ANOVAs), mediation analyses using the PROCESS macro, and moderated mediation models.
resultsCompared with the low-SPS pilots, the high-SPS pilots had significantly longer decision times (F = 7.67, p = .008). Furthermore, a significant interaction effect between SPS and risk level was observed for flight performance; high-SPS pilots had significantly lower overall performance scores, specifically under high-risk conditions (p < .001). A mediation analysis indicated that indecisiveness mediated the SPS and decision time (indirect effect = 0.039, 95% CI [0.0031, 0.0792]). Moreover, BA9 activation moderated indecisiveness and decision delay (interaction β = 0.409, p = .014).
conclusionSPS and indecisiveness jointly contribute to delayed decision-making and poor flight performance under stress, with DLPFC engagement amplifying the delay in decision-making. The findings integrate trait, behavioural, and neural factors into a unified model of aviation decision performance.
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.