Examining post-error performance in a complex multitasking environment.

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Christina M Lewis, Robert S Gutzwiller
{"title":"Examining post-error performance in a complex multitasking environment.","authors":"Christina M Lewis, Robert S Gutzwiller","doi":"10.1186/s41235-023-00512-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Previous work on indices of error-monitoring strongly supports that errors are distracting and can deplete attentional resources. In this study, we use an ecologically valid multitasking paradigm to test post-error behavior. It was predicted that after failing an initial task, a subject re-presented with that task in conflict with another competing simultaneous task, would more likely miss their response opportunity for the competing task and stay 'tunneled' on the initially errored task. Additionally, we predicted that an error's effect on attention would dissipate after several seconds, making error cascades less likely when subsequent conflict tasks are delayed. A multi-attribute task battery was used to present tasks and collect measures of both post-error and post-correct performance. Results supported both predictions: post-error accuracy on the competing task was lower compared to post-correct accuracy, and error-proportions were higher at shorter delays, dissipating over time. An exploratory analysis also demonstrated that following errors (as opposed to post-correct trials), participants clicked more on the task panel of the initial error regardless of delay; this continued task-engagement provides preliminary support for errors leading to a cognitive tunneling effect.</p>","PeriodicalId":46827,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","volume":"8 1","pages":"65"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10589164/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-023-00512-y","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Previous work on indices of error-monitoring strongly supports that errors are distracting and can deplete attentional resources. In this study, we use an ecologically valid multitasking paradigm to test post-error behavior. It was predicted that after failing an initial task, a subject re-presented with that task in conflict with another competing simultaneous task, would more likely miss their response opportunity for the competing task and stay 'tunneled' on the initially errored task. Additionally, we predicted that an error's effect on attention would dissipate after several seconds, making error cascades less likely when subsequent conflict tasks are delayed. A multi-attribute task battery was used to present tasks and collect measures of both post-error and post-correct performance. Results supported both predictions: post-error accuracy on the competing task was lower compared to post-correct accuracy, and error-proportions were higher at shorter delays, dissipating over time. An exploratory analysis also demonstrated that following errors (as opposed to post-correct trials), participants clicked more on the task panel of the initial error regardless of delay; this continued task-engagement provides preliminary support for errors leading to a cognitive tunneling effect.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

在复杂的多任务环境中检查错误后的性能。
先前关于错误监测指数的研究有力地支持错误会分散注意力,并会耗尽注意力资源。在这项研究中,我们使用一个生态有效的多任务范式来测试错误后的行为。据预测,在一项初始任务失败后,一名受试者在与另一项同时进行的竞争任务发生冲突的情况下重新提出该任务,他们更有可能错过对竞争任务的回应机会,并在最初出错的任务上保持“隧道”状态。此外,我们预测,错误对注意力的影响会在几秒钟后消散,当后续冲突任务延迟时,错误级联的可能性会降低。使用多属性任务组来呈现任务,并收集错误后和纠正后性能的度量。结果支持了这两种预测:与校正后的准确度相比,竞争任务的误差后准确度较低,并且在较短的延迟下误差比例较高,随着时间的推移逐渐消失。一项探索性分析还表明,在出现错误后(与纠正后的试验相反),参与者在任务面板上点击更多的初始错误,而不考虑延迟;这种持续的任务参与为导致认知隧道效应的错误提供了初步支持。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
7.30%
发文量
96
审稿时长
25 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信