How does manipulation of secondary task scheduling affect human performance?

Patrice D. Tremoulet; Kathleen M. Stibler; Patrick Craven; Joyce Barton; Adam Gifford; Susan Harkness Regli

doi:10.1177/154193120605001749

How does manipulation of secondary task scheduling affect human performance?

Patrice D. Tremoulet, Kathleen M. Stibler, Patrick Craven, Joyce Barton, Adam Gifford, Susan Harkness Regli

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution

Abstract

Systems that can track and intelligently adapt to changes in users' cognitive capacities may help to improve human performance. The experiment reported here was designed to assess the benefit of placing neuro-physiological sensors on users to provide data about their cognitive states that can drive performance mitigations. A test group of 16 participants performed a primary task while monitoring for alerts (secondary task) under four conditions: no-mitigation (alerts presented as they arrive), random mitigation (system randomly alters the presentation times of alerts), sensor-driven mitigation (system uses sensor data to influence alert presentation times), and user-driven mitigation (participants pressed a button to influence the alert presentation times). Participants completed no-mitigation and user-driven mitigation conditions faster than sensor-driven and random mitigation conditions, but their accuracy scores did not differ significantly across the four conditions. This is likely due to a ceiling effect: participants' accuracy scores exceeded 90% in every condition. Future work should investigate the possibility that user-driven mitigation may, in some cases, improve performance better than sensor-driven mitigation.

Original language	English (US)
Title of host publication	Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50th Annual Meeting, HFES 2006
Publisher	Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Inc.
Pages	1945-1948
Number of pages	4
ISBN (Print)	9780945289296
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120605001749
State	Published - 2006
Externally published	Yes
Event	50th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2006 - San Francisco, CA, United States Duration: Oct 16 2006 → Oct 20 2006

Publication series

Name	Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
ISSN (Print)	1071-1813

Other

Other	50th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2006
Country/Territory	United States
City	San Francisco, CA
Period	10/16/06 → 10/20/06

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

Human Factors and Ergonomics

Access to Document

10.1177/154193120605001749

Cite this

Tremoulet, P. D., Stibler, K. M., Craven, P., Barton, J., Gifford, A., & Regli, S. H. (2006). How does manipulation of secondary task scheduling affect human performance? In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50th Annual Meeting, HFES 2006 (pp. 1945-1948). (Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society). Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Inc.. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120605001749

@inproceedings{d7e3b73a27674e29bce9402ec36a3777,

title = "How does manipulation of secondary task scheduling affect human performance?",

abstract = "Systems that can track and intelligently adapt to changes in users' cognitive capacities may help to improve human performance. The experiment reported here was designed to assess the benefit of placing neuro-physiological sensors on users to provide data about their cognitive states that can drive performance mitigations. A test group of 16 participants performed a primary task while monitoring for alerts (secondary task) under four conditions: no-mitigation (alerts presented as they arrive), random mitigation (system randomly alters the presentation times of alerts), sensor-driven mitigation (system uses sensor data to influence alert presentation times), and user-driven mitigation (participants pressed a button to influence the alert presentation times). Participants completed no-mitigation and user-driven mitigation conditions faster than sensor-driven and random mitigation conditions, but their accuracy scores did not differ significantly across the four conditions. This is likely due to a ceiling effect: participants' accuracy scores exceeded 90% in every condition. Future work should investigate the possibility that user-driven mitigation may, in some cases, improve performance better than sensor-driven mitigation.",

author = "Tremoulet, {Patrice D.} and Stibler, {Kathleen M.} and Patrick Craven and Joyce Barton and Adam Gifford and Regli, {Susan Harkness}",

year = "2006",

doi = "10.1177/154193120605001749",

language = "English (US)",

isbn = "9780945289296",

series = "Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society",

publisher = "Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Inc.",

pages = "1945--1948",

booktitle = "Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50th Annual Meeting, HFES 2006",

note = "50th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2006 ; Conference date: 16-10-2006 Through 20-10-2006",

}

Tremoulet, PD, Stibler, KM, Craven, P, Barton, J, Gifford, A & Regli, SH 2006, How does manipulation of secondary task scheduling affect human performance? in Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50th Annual Meeting, HFES 2006. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Inc., pp. 1945-1948, 50th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, HFES 2006, San Francisco, CA, United States, 10/16/06. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120605001749

How does manipulation of secondary task scheduling affect human performance? / Tremoulet, Patrice D.; Stibler, Kathleen M.; Craven, Patrick et al.
Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50th Annual Meeting, HFES 2006. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Inc., 2006. p. 1945-1948 (Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society).

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Conference contribution