Adaptation of the Rating Scale Mental Effort (RSME) for use in Indonesia

Abstract The Rating Scale Mental Effort (RSME) is a unidimensional instrument used to measure subjective mental workload. The RSME consists of a line with a length of 150 mm marked with nine anchor points, each accompanied by a descriptive label indicating a degree of effort. The RSME has been widely used in Western countries (e.g., in Europe and North America), but, when translated to Indonesian, has been shown to be relatively insensitive to changes in mental effort among Indonesians, raising the question of whether the insensitivity is related to national culture or to the translation of the scale. To investigate whether the relative insensitivity of the RSME might lie on the translation of the instrument, a new, seven-anchor point, version of the RSME was created to better reflect how the anchor points are interpreted by Indonesians. The new version of the RSME was compared with the existing, nine-anchor point version of the instrument in an experiment in which 100 participants performed a search task of different levels of difficulty. Half of the participants used the original RSME and half the adapted instrument. The adapted instrument appeared to be more sensitive to changes in load than the original RSME. However, a comparison with Dutch participants who performed the same task suggests that culture, and not only properties of the scale used to measure mental effort, influences the measurement of subjective mental workload. Relevance to industry As industrialization increases in developing countries, so does the need for low-cost, easy to implement, and valid mental-workload instruments. We adapted the Rating Scale Mental Effort (RSME) for use by Indonesians. The adapted RSME shows improved sensitivity, but cultural differences in reporting load are still apparent.

[1]  B. Cain.  A Review of the Mental Workload Literature , 2007 .

[2]  F. Thomas Eggemeier,et al.  Workload assessment methodology. , 1986 .

[3]  S. Schwartz,et al.  Extending the Cross-Cultural Validity of the Theory of Basic Human Values with a Different Method of Measurement , 2001 .

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

[5]  Ronald K. Hambleton,et al.  The Next Generation of the ITC Test Translation and Adaptation Guidelines , 2001 .

[6]  Hasan Ayaz,et al.  Optical brain monitoring for operator training and mental workload assessment , 2012, NeuroImage.

[7]  Angela Didomenico,et al.  Effects of different physical workload parameters on mental workload and performance , 2011 .

[8]  Thomas E. Nygren,et al.  The Subjective Workload Assessment Technique: A Scaling Procedure for Measuring Mental Workload , 1988 .

[9]  R. Brislin.  Back-Translation for Cross-Cultural Research , 1970 .

[10]  F. T. Eggemeier,et al.  Recommendations for Mental Workload Measurement in a Test and Evaluation Environment , 1993 .

[11]  A Pretorius,et al.  Development of a mental workload index: A systems approach , 2007, Ergonomics.

[12]  Y. Lin,et al.  A method for building a real-time cluster-based continuous mental workload scale , 2009 .

[13]  M. Bond,et al.  Social Axioms , 2002 .

[14]  D. Marple-Horvat,et al.  The role of effort in moderating the anxiety – performance relationship: Testing the prediction of processing efficiency theory in simulated rally driving , 2006, Journal of sports sciences.

[15]  Alter Sidoruk,et al.  Iethodology for Evaluation of Image Enhancement Techniques , 1977 .

[16]  F Nachreiner,et al.  International standards on mental work-load--the ISO 10,075 series. , 1999, Industrial health.

[17]  G. Hofstede,et al.  Cultures and Organizations: Software of the Mind , 1991 .

[18]  Ari Widyanti,et al.  Cultural influences on the measurement of subjective mental workload , 2011 .

[19]  Daniel Gopher,et al.  Workload: An examination of the concept. , 1986 .

[20]  C. Weikert,et al.  Aging and Human factors , 1996 .

[21]  R. Shiffrin,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: I , 1977 .

[22]  Anthony W. K. Gaillard,et al.  Pilot workload evaluated with subjective and physiological measures , 1993 .

[23]  José J. Cañas,et al.  A neuroergonomic approach to evaluating mental workload in hypermedia interactions , 2011 .

[24]  Dick de Waard,et al.  The measurement of drivers' mental workload , 1996 .

[25]  L. Kaufman,et al.  Handbook of perception and human performance , 1986 .

[26]  Sandra G. Hart,et al.  Nasa-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX); 20 Years Later , 2006 .

[27]  Susana Rubio,et al.  Evaluation of Subjective Mental Workload: A Comparison of SWAT, NASA‐TLX, and Workload Profile Methods , 2004 .

[28]  Asit Dey,et al.  Sensitivity and diagnosticity of NASA-TLX and simplified SWAT to assess the mental workload associated with operating an agricultural sprayer , 2010, Ergonomics.

[29]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and Automatic Human Information Processing: 1. Detection, Search, and Attention. , 1977 .

[30]  D de Waard,et al.  Cardiovascular state changes during performance of a simulated ambulance dispatchers' task: potential use for adaptive support. , 2009, Applied ergonomics.

[31]  Walter Schneider,et al.  Controlled and automatic human information processing: II. Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. , 1977 .

[32]  Y. Poortinga,et al.  Towards an integrated analysis of bias in cross-cultural assessment , 1997 .

[33]  Kilseop Ryu,et al.  Evaluation of mental workload with a combined measure based on physiological indices during a dual task of tracking and mental arithmetic , 2005 .

[34]  J Aasman,et al.  Operator Effort and the Measurement of Heart-Rate Variability , 1987, Human factors.