Search PubMedSearch

Biomedical subjects

M Donk

Publications and source records attributed to M Donk.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Human monitoring behavior in a multiple-instrument setting: independent sampling, sequential sampling or arrangement-dependent sampling.

This study aims at contributing to the understanding of human monitoring behavior in multiple instrument settings. Eye movements were recorded so as to test whether sampling behavior is more consistent with traditional normative models (Senders, 1983) or with alternative approaches that emphasize heuristics and strategies rather than quantitative modelling. A core assumption of normative modelling concerns the premise that sampling one instrument is independent of the other instruments in an array. This assumption was tested in three experiments. In a first experiment, subjects monitored four independent continuous stochasts so as to detect critical situations. In a fast condition, two instruments were paired with two relatively fast changing instruments. In a slow condition, the two instruments were paired with two relatively slow changing instruments. Sampling one instrument appeared to be independent of the rates of change of the other instruments in the array. Furthermore, sampling was a function of the information generation rates of the individual instruments. This is in accordance with normative modelling. However, the spatial arrangement of the instruments on the display as well as the presence of a central fixation point strongly affected sampling behavior. In a second experiment, subjects monitored six instruments. In addition, there was no central fixation point. The results indicated again that a perceptual heuristic was used in that the spatial arrangement of the instruments on the display affected sampling behavior. Horizontal transitions occurred more often than would be predicted on the basis of independent sampling. Diagonal transitions occurred less often than would be predicted. Finally, a third experiment tested whether this preference for sampling by means of horizontal eye movements at the expense of diagonal eye movements would, under conflict situations, affect the mean sampling interval of specific instruments. In a four-instrument monitoring task, sampling intervals of two slow and two fast independent instruments were compared in different spatial arrangements. Sampling intervals strongly depended on the arrangement of the instruments on the display. Human monitoring seems to be biased by a tendency towards sampling by means of horizontal transitions at the cost of diagonal transitions. Under certain conditions, this tendency might make sampling intervals unrelated to the information generation rates of the individual instruments.

Adolescent

The effect of secondary task load on visual sampling behaviour.

This paper investigates a dual-task experiment, which looked at whether periodical sampling (Senders 1983) of relatively fast changing instruments results from an imperfect internal representation of these instruments, or whether it merely represents a strategy adopted by the observer to overcome overload situations. Subjects either monitored a fast or a slow instrument in combination with a difficult, easy or no tracking task. The results indicated that sampling behaviour was generally unaffected by the external load imposed by the tracking task, suggesting that periodical sampling results from an imperfect internal representation and is not the result of a strategic decision of the observer to overcome overload.

Adult

Resources and dual-task performance; resource allocation versus task integration.

This study aims at contributing to the explanation of dual-task performance in terms of either resource allocation or of task interference and integration. Twenty-four subjects carried out, single and in combination, a motor interval production task and a perceptual target detection task on the basis of combined memory and display search. The demands of the target detection task were varied by increasing or decreasing the presentation rate of successive search displays. Furthermore, the presentation rate was either constant or variable. The dual-task condition had a negative effect on interval production, the extent of which was unaffected by either rate or variability of display presentation. This means that there was no evidence for synchronizing interval production with display presentation, so that the major opportunity for task integration did not substantiate. It is suggested that the two tasks use different resource pools in addition to a common mechanism, the limited capacity of which causes a general interference in dual-task conditions.

Adolescent