• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

实时性能反馈和绩效强调对持续注意反应任务(SART)的影响。

The effects of real-time performance feedback and performance emphasis on the sustained attention to response task (SART).

机构信息

George Mason University, 4400 University Dr, Fairfax, VA, 22030, USA.

出版信息

Psychol Res. 2022 Sep;86(6):1972-1979. doi: 10.1007/s00426-021-01602-6. Epub 2021 Oct 8.

DOI:10.1007/s00426-021-01602-6
PMID:34623490
Abstract

The sustained attention to response task (SART) has been used for over 20 years to assess participants' response times and inability to withhold to No-Go stimuli (commission errors). While there is debate in the literature regarding what causes commissions errors in the SART, there is agreement the SART is subject to a speed-accuracy trade-off (SATO). Researchers have demonstrated that performance on the SART can be influenced by directive instructions to participants to prioritize either speed or accuracy during the task. In the present study, we investigated whether real-time performance feedback and whether feedback emphasis (emphasizing speed or accuracy) affected participants' response times and accuracy. We found performance feedback per se had no impact on performance, but performance emphasis did affect performance, apparently shifting the SATO. This finding provides further evidence that the commission errors in the SART are not indicative of sustained attention or vigilance as those terms are commonly used in the literature, but more likely assess response strategy and motor control (or lack of motor control). These findings have implications for the psychological assessment literature, as well as applied areas where SART findings have been utilized such as shoot/no-shoot decision making.

摘要

持续注意反应任务(SART)已经使用了 20 多年,用于评估参与者的反应时间和无法抑制对“不做”刺激(错误反应)的反应。虽然文献中对于 SART 中产生错误反应的原因存在争议,但人们一致认为 SART 受到速度准确性权衡(SATO)的影响。研究人员已经证明,参与者在任务期间优先考虑速度或准确性的指令可以影响 SART 的表现。在本研究中,我们调查了实时性能反馈以及反馈重点(强调速度或准确性)是否会影响参与者的反应时间和准确性。我们发现,性能反馈本身对性能没有影响,但性能重点确实会影响性能,显然会改变 SATO。这一发现进一步证明,SART 中的错误反应并不表示持续注意力或警惕,因为这些术语在文献中经常被使用,而更可能评估反应策略和运动控制(或缺乏运动控制)。这些发现对心理评估文献以及 SART 结果被应用的领域(例如射击/不射击决策)有影响。

相似文献

1
The effects of real-time performance feedback and performance emphasis on the sustained attention to response task (SART).实时性能反馈和绩效强调对持续注意反应任务(SART)的影响。
Psychol Res. 2022 Sep;86(6):1972-1979. doi: 10.1007/s00426-021-01602-6. Epub 2021 Oct 8.
2
You are measuring the decision to be fast, not inattention: the Sustained Attention to Response Task does not measure sustained attention.你正在衡量的是快速做出决策的能力,而非注意力不集中:持续注意力反应任务并不能测量持续注意力。
Exp Brain Res. 2018 Aug;236(8):2255-2262. doi: 10.1007/s00221-018-5291-6. Epub 2018 May 30.
3
Reliable- and unreliable-warning cues in the Sustained Attention to Response Task.在持续注意反应任务中可靠和不可靠的警告线索。
Exp Brain Res. 2011 Mar;209(3):401-7. doi: 10.1007/s00221-011-2563-9. Epub 2011 Feb 2.
4
Prolonging the response movement inhibits the feed-forward motor program in the sustained attention to response task.在持续注意反应任务中,延长反应动作会抑制前馈运动程序。
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2018 Feb;183:75-84. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2018.01.001. Epub 2018 Jan 18.
5
Go-stimuli proportion influences response strategy in a sustained attention to response task.刺激比例在持续注意力反应任务中影响反应策略。
Exp Brain Res. 2016 Oct;234(10):2989-98. doi: 10.1007/s00221-016-4701-x. Epub 2016 Jun 21.
6
Global interference and spatial uncertainty in the Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART).持续性操作测试(SART)中的全局干扰和空间不确定性。
Conscious Cogn. 2010 Mar;19(1):77-85. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2010.01.006.
7
The effects of warning cues and attention-capturing stimuli on the sustained attention to response task.警示线索和注意力捕捉刺激对持续注意力反应任务的影响。
Exp Brain Res. 2015 Apr;233(4):1061-8. doi: 10.1007/s00221-014-4179-3. Epub 2014 Dec 24.
8
Spider stimuli improve response inhibition.蜘蛛刺激可改善反应抑制。
Conscious Cogn. 2015 May;33:406-13. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2015.02.014. Epub 2015 Mar 12.
9
Perceptual decoupling or trigger happiness: the effect of response delays and shorter presentation times on a go-no-go task with a high go prevalence.感知解耦或触发快乐:在高 Go 发生率的 Go/No-Go 任务中,反应延迟和较短呈现时间的影响。
Exp Brain Res. 2024 Apr;242(4):949-958. doi: 10.1007/s00221-024-06799-7. Epub 2024 Mar 6.
10
Response uncertainty influences response bias in the sustained attention to response task: a signal detection theory perspective.反应不确定性影响持续反应任务中的反应偏差:信号检测理论视角。
Psychol Res. 2024 Feb;88(1):81-90. doi: 10.1007/s00426-023-01847-3. Epub 2023 Jun 15.

引用本文的文献

1
How Do You Know If You Were Mind Wandering? Dissociating Explicit Memories of Off Task Thought From Subjective Feelings of Inattention.你如何知道自己是否走神了?将偏离任务思维的显性记忆与注意力不集中的主观感受区分开来。
Open Mind (Camb). 2024 May 10;8:666-687. doi: 10.1162/opmi_a_00142. eCollection 2024.
2
Is the performance at the implicit association test sensitive to feedback presentation? A Rasch-based analysis.内隐联想测验的表现是否对反馈呈现敏感?基于 Rasch 的分析。
Psychol Res. 2023 Apr;87(3):737-750. doi: 10.1007/s00426-022-01703-w. Epub 2022 Jul 8.

本文引用的文献

1
Testing failure-to-identify hunting incidents using an immersive simulation: Is it viable?利用沉浸式模拟测试无法识别狩猎事件:是否可行?
Appl Ergon. 2021 May;93:103358. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2021.103358. Epub 2021 Jan 20.
2
The quick and the dead: A paradigm for studying friendly fire.速战速决:研究友军火力的典范。
Appl Ergon. 2020 Apr;84:103032. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2019.103032. Epub 2020 Jan 10.
3
Response Complexity Reduces Errors on a Response Inhibition Task.反应复杂性降低了反应抑制任务中的错误。
Hum Factors. 2020 Aug;62(5):787-799. doi: 10.1177/0018720819852801. Epub 2019 Jun 25.
4
You are measuring the decision to be fast, not inattention: the Sustained Attention to Response Task does not measure sustained attention.你正在衡量的是快速做出决策的能力,而非注意力不集中:持续注意力反应任务并不能测量持续注意力。
Exp Brain Res. 2018 Aug;236(8):2255-2262. doi: 10.1007/s00221-018-5291-6. Epub 2018 May 30.
5
Prolonging the response movement inhibits the feed-forward motor program in the sustained attention to response task.在持续注意反应任务中,延长反应动作会抑制前馈运动程序。
Acta Psychol (Amst). 2018 Feb;183:75-84. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2018.01.001. Epub 2018 Jan 18.
6
Methodology of performance scoring in the d2 sustained-attention test: Cumulative-reliability functions and practical guidelines.d2 持续性注意力测验中的表现评分方法:累积可靠性函数和实用指南。
Psychol Assess. 2018 Mar;30(3):339-357. doi: 10.1037/pas0000482. Epub 2017 Apr 13.
7
Mobilizing cognition for speeded action: try-harder instructions promote motivated readiness in the constant-foreperiod paradigm.调动认知以实现快速行动:“更加努力尝试”的指令在恒定前间隔范式中促进动机性准备状态。
Psychol Res. 2017 Nov;81(6):1135-1151. doi: 10.1007/s00426-016-0810-1. Epub 2016 Sep 20.
8
Go-stimuli proportion influences response strategy in a sustained attention to response task.刺激比例在持续注意力反应任务中影响反应策略。
Exp Brain Res. 2016 Oct;234(10):2989-98. doi: 10.1007/s00221-016-4701-x. Epub 2016 Jun 21.
9
Friendly Fire and the Sustained Attention to Response Task.友军火力与持续注意力反应任务
Hum Factors. 2015 Nov;57(7):1219-34. doi: 10.1177/0018720815605703. Epub 2015 Sep 24.
10
Passive perceptual learning versus active searching in a novel stimuli vigilance task.在一项新型刺激警觉任务中被动知觉学习与主动搜索的比较
Exp Brain Res. 2015 May;233(5):1481-9. doi: 10.1007/s00221-015-4222-z. Epub 2015 Feb 19.