Kansas State University, Manhattan, USA.
Hum Factors. 2019 Aug;61(5):749-762. doi: 10.1177/0018720818809877. Epub 2018 Nov 19.
We used this experiment to determine the degree to which cues to difficulty are used to make judgments of difficulty (JODs).
Traditional approaches involve seeking to standardize the information people used to evaluate subjective workload; however, it is likely that conscious and unconscious cues underlie peoples' JODs.
We designed a video game task that tested the degree to which time-on-task, performance-based feedback, and central cues to difficulty informed JODs. These relationships were modeled along five continuous dimensions of difficulty.
Central cues most strongly contributed to JODs; judgments were supplemented by peripheral cues (performance-based feedback and time-on-task) even though these cues were not always valid. In addition, participants became more likely to rate the task as "easier" over time.
Although central cues are strong predictors of task difficulty, people confuse task difficulty (central cues), effort allocation and skill (performance-based feedback), and proxy cues to difficulty (time) when making JODs.
Identifying the functional relationships between cues to difficulty and JODs will provide valuable insight regarding the information that people use to evaluate tasks and to make decisions.
我们利用该实验来确定人们在多大程度上利用困难线索来做出难度判断(JODs)。
传统方法涉及寻求标准化人们用于评估主观工作量的信息;然而,人们的 JODs 可能基于有意识和无意识的线索。
我们设计了一个视频游戏任务,以测试任务时间、基于表现的反馈和困难的中心线索在多大程度上影响 JODs。这些关系是沿着五个连续的难度维度建模的。
中心线索对 JODs 的贡献最大;即使这些线索并不总是有效,判断也会得到周边线索(基于表现的反馈和任务时间)的补充。此外,参与者随着时间的推移更有可能将任务评为“更容易”。
尽管中心线索是任务难度的强有力预测指标,但人们在做出 JODs 时会混淆任务难度(中心线索)、努力分配和技能(基于表现的反馈)以及困难的代理线索(时间)。
确定困难线索和 JODs 之间的功能关系将为人们评估任务和做出决策所使用的信息提供有价值的见解。