Lamond Nicole, Jay Sarah M, Dorrian Jillian, Ferguson Sally A, Roach Gregory D, Dawson Drew
Center for Sleep Research, University of South Australia, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Behav Res Methods. 2008 Feb;40(1):347-52. doi: 10.3758/brm.40.1.347.
In this study, we evaluated the sensitivity of a 5-min personal digital assistant-psychomotor vigilance test (PDA-PVT) to severe sleep loss. Twenty-one participants completed a 10-min PVT-192 and a 5-min PDA-PVT at two hourly intervals during 62 h of sustained wakefulness. For both tasks, response speed and number of lapses (RTs > 500) per minute significantly increased with increasing hours of wakefulness. Overall, standardized response speed scores on the 5-min PDA-PVT closely tracked those of the PVT-192; however, the PDA-PVT was generally associated with more lapses/minute. Closer inspection of the data indicated that when the level of sleep loss and fatigue became more severe (i.e., Day 3), the 5-min PDA-PVT was not quite as sensitive as the 10-min PVT-192 when 2- to 10-sec foreperiods were used for both. It is likely, however, that the observed differences between the two devices was due to differences in task length. Thus, the findings provide further evidence of the validity of the 5-min PDA-PVT as a substitute for the 10-min PVT-192, particularly in circumstances in which a shorter test is required and/or the PVT-192 is not as practical.
在本研究中,我们评估了5分钟个人数字助理-精神运动警觉性测试(PDA-PVT)对严重睡眠剥夺的敏感性。21名参与者在持续清醒62小时期间,每隔一小时完成一次10分钟的PVT-192测试和一次5分钟的PDA-PVT测试。对于这两项任务,随着清醒时间的增加,反应速度和每分钟失误次数(反应时间>500毫秒)均显著增加。总体而言,5分钟PDA-PVT的标准化反应速度得分与PVT-192的得分密切相关;然而,PDA-PVT通常每分钟失误次数更多。对数据的进一步检查表明,当睡眠剥夺和疲劳程度变得更严重时(即第3天),在两者均采用2至10秒的前间期时,5分钟PDA-PVT的敏感性不如10分钟PVT-192。不过,这两种设备之间观察到的差异可能是由于任务时长不同所致。因此,这些发现进一步证明了5分钟PDA-PVT作为10分钟PVT-192替代品的有效性,特别是在需要更短测试和/或PVT-192不太实用的情况下。