Cognitive workload measurement and modeling under divided attention.

Motorists often engage in secondary tasks unrelated to driving that increase cognitive workload, resulting in fatal crashes and injuries. An International Standards Organization method for measuring a driver's cognitive workload, the detection response task (DRT), correlates well with driving outcomes, but investigation of its putative theoretical basis in terms of finite attention capacity remains limited. We address this knowledge gap using evidence-accumulation modeling of simple and choice versions of the DRT in a driving scenario. Our experiments demonstrate how dual-task load affects the parameters of evidence-accumulation models. We found that the cognitive workload induced by a secondary task (counting backward by 3s) reduced the rate of evidence accumulation, consistent with rates being sensitive to limited-capacity attention. We also found a compensatory increase in the amount of evidence required for a response and a small speeding in the time for nondecision processes. The International Standards Organization version of the DRT was found to be most sensitive to cognitive workload. A Wald-distributed evidence-accumulation model augmented with a parameter measuring response omissions provided a parsimonious measure of the underlying causes of cognitive workload in this task. This work demonstrates that evidence-accumulation modeling can accurately represent data produced by cognitive workload measurements, reproduce the data through simulation, and provide supporting evidence for the cognitive processes underlying cognitive workload. Our results provide converging evidence that the DRT method is sensitive to dynamic fluctuations in limited-capacity attention. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

[1]  Shayne Loft,et al.  Racing to Remember: A Theory of Decision Control in Event-Based Prospective Memory , 2018, Psychological review.

[2]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Understanding the Causes of Adapting, and Failing to Adapt, to Time Pressure in a Complex Multistimulus Environment , 2018, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[3]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Dynamic models of choice , 2018, Behavior Research Methods.

[4]  David L. Strayer,et al.  Dynamic Workload Fluctuations in Driver/Non-Driver Conversational DYADS , 2017 .

[5]  Shayne Loft,et al.  Accumulating Evidence About What Prospective Memory Costs Actually Reveal , 2017, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[6]  Spencer C. Castro.  How Handheld Mobile Device Size and Hand Location May Affect Divided Attention , 2017 .

[7]  D. Strayer,et al.  Modeling cognitive load effects of conversation between a passenger and driver , 2017, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[8]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Failures of cognitive control or attention? The case of stop-signal deficits in schizophrenia , 2017, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[9]  David L. Strayer,et al.  Validating Two Assessment Strategies for Visual and Cognitive Load in a Simulated Driving Task , 2016 .

[10]  David L. Strayer,et al.  Extending the Detection Response Task to Simultaneously Measure Cognitive and Visual Task Demands , 2016 .

[11]  M. Marsman,et al.  What can we learn from Plausible Values? , 2016, Psychometrika.

[12]  Donald L. Fisher,et al.  SPIDER: A Framework for Understanding Driver Distraction , 2016, Hum. Factors.

[13]  Jonathon Love,et al.  A Bayesian approach for estimating the probability of trigger failures in the stop-signal paradigm , 2016, Behavior research methods.

[14]  David L. Strayer,et al.  Assessing Cognitive Distraction in the Automobile , 2015, Hum. Factors.

[15]  R. Ratcliff.  Modeling one-choice and two-choice driving tasks , 2015, Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics.

[16]  R. Remington,et al.  Slow down and remember to remember! A delay theory of prospective memory costs. , 2015, Psychological review.

[17]  Elizabeth N. Mazzae,et al.  Detection Response Task (DRT) Evaluation for Driver Distraction Measurement Application , 2014 .

[18]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[19]  T. Dingus,et al.  Distracted driving and risk of road crashes among novice and experienced drivers. , 2014, The New England journal of medicine.

[20]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Modeling simple driving tasks with a one-boundary diffusion model , 2013, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[21]  E. Wagenmakers,et al.  Bayesian Estimation of Multinomial Processing Tree Models with Heterogeneity in Participants and Items , 2013, Psychometrika.

[22]  A K Pradhan,et al.  The view from the road: the contribution of on-road glance-monitoring technologies to understanding driver behavior. , 2013, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[23]  Brandon M. Turner,et al.  A method for efficiently sampling from distributions with correlated dimensions. , 2013, Psychological methods.

[24]  Thom Baguley,et al.  Calculating and graphing within-subject confidence intervals for ANOVA , 2012, Behavior research methods.

[25]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Diffusion model for one-choice reaction-time tasks and the cognitive effects of sleep deprivation , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[26]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Converging measures of workload capacity , 2010, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[27]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  The overconstraint of response time models: Rethinking the scaling problem , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[28]  Scott D. Brown,et al.  The simplest complete model of choice response time: Linear ballistic accumulation , 2008, Cognitive Psychology.

[29]  Richard D. Morey,et al.  Confidence Intervals from Normalized Data: A correction to Cousineau (2005) , 2008 .

[30]  Jeff K Caird,et al.  A meta-analysis of the effects of cell phones on driver performance. , 2008, Accident; analysis and prevention.

[31]  Roger Ratcliff,et al.  The Diffusion Decision Model: Theory and Data for Two-Choice Decision Tasks , 2008, Neural Computation.

[32]  Klaus Oberauer,et al.  Individual differences in components of reaction time distributions and their relations to working memory and intelligence. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[33]  D. Strayer,et al.  Cell-Phone–Induced Driver Distraction , 2007 .

[34]  K. C. Klauer.  Hierarchical Multinomial Processing Tree Models: A Latent-Trait Approach , 2006 .

[35]  Denis Cousineau,et al.  Confidence intervals in within-subject designs: A simpler solution to Loftus and Masson's method , 2005 .

[36]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  Fitting Wald and ex-Wald distributions to response time data: An example using functions for the S-PLUS package , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[37]  Roger Frost,et al.  International Organization for Standardization (ISO) , 2004 .

[38]  E. Wagenmakers,et al.  AIC model selection using Akaike weights , 2004, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[39]  M. Biernat,et al.  Stereotypes and Shifting Standards: Some Paradoxical Effects of Cognitive Load , 2003 .

[40]  Bradley P. Carlin,et al.  Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit , 2002 .

[41]  R. Baumeister,et al.  Self-regulation and depletion of limited resources: does self-control resemble a muscle? , 2000, Psychological bulletin.

[42]  Andrew Gelman,et al.  General methods for monitoring convergence of iterative simulations , 1998 .

[43]  Jeffrey N. Rouder,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article MODELING RESPONSE TIMES FOR TWO-CHOICE DECISIONS , 2022 .

[44]  G. Logan.  On the ability to inhibit thought and action , 1984 .

[45]  D. Navon,et al.  On the Economy of the Human Processing System: A Model of Multiple Capacity. , 1977 .

[46]  Donald Laming,et al.  Information theory of choice-reaction times , 1968 .

[47]  D. Mainland.  The Bayesian approach , 1967 .

[48]  A. Welford.  THE ‘PSYCHOLOGICAL REFRACTORY PERIOD’ AND THE TIMING OF HIGH‐SPEED PERFORMANCE—A REVIEW AND A THEORY , 1952 .

[49]  Brandon M. Turner,et al.  A flexible and efficient hierarchical Bayesian approach to the exploration of individual differences in cognitive-model-based neuroscience. , 2018 .

[50]  Andrew Heathcote,et al.  An introduction to good practices in cognitive modeling , 2015 .

[51]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[52]  I. Davies.  Cognitive workload measurement , 2014 .

[53]  R. Ratcliff,et al.  Modeling reaction time and accuracy of multiple-alternative decisions , 2010, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[54]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection theory: A user's guide, 2nd ed. , 2005 .

[55]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[56]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Attention and Effort , 1973 .

[57]  D. Strayer,et al.  Provided for Non-commercial Research and Educational Use Only. Not for Reproduction, Distribution or Commercial Use. Cognitive Distraction While Multitasking in the Automobile , 2022 .

[58]  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article Central Interference in Driving Is There Any Stopping the Psychological Refractory Period? , 2022 .