Fraulini Nicholas W, Hancock Gabriella M, Neigel Alexis R, Claypoole Victoria L, Szalma James L
Department of Psychology, University of Central Florida.
Psychol Rev. 2017 Jul;124(4):525-531. doi: 10.1037/rev0000066.
Thomson, Besner, and Smilek (2016) propose that performance decrements associated with sustained attention are not consistently the result of a decline in perceptual sensitivity. Thomson et al. (2016) present empirical evidence using a novel, nontraditional vigilance task to support their assumptions. However, in the present rebuttal, we argue that the authors have not only have misinterpreted previous research in sustained attention, but also have misapplied those interpretations to their study. Thomson et al. have also neglected key elements of the literature in their argument, including research on expectancy theory and individual differences on vigilance performance. Furthermore, Thomson and colleagues implement an experimental paradigm that is not appropriate for evaluating sensitivity and bias changes in vigilance tasks. Finally, their analyses do not capture the manner in which changes in response bias and sensitivity can manifest in signal detection theory. We discuss the theoretical and experimental issues contained in Thomson et al. (2016) and propose suggestions for future vigilance research in this area. (PsycINFO Database Record
汤姆森、贝斯纳和斯米莱克（2016年）提出，与持续注意力相关的表现下降并非始终是感知敏感性下降的结果。汤姆森等人（2016年）使用一种新颖的、非传统的警觉任务提供了实证证据来支持他们的假设。然而，在本反驳中，我们认为作者不仅误解了先前关于持续注意力的研究，还将这些误解错误地应用到了他们的研究中。汤姆森等人在其论证中还忽略了文献中的关键要素，包括期望理论研究和警觉表现的个体差异。此外，汤姆森及其同事采用了一种不适用于评估警觉任务中敏感性和偏差变化的实验范式。最后，他们的分析没有捕捉到响应偏差和敏感性变化在信号检测理论中可能表现出来的方式。我们讨论了汤姆森等人（2016年）中包含的理论和实验问题，并为该领域未来的警觉研究提出了建议。（《心理学文摘数据库记录》
