| Title |
Investigating systematic individual differences in sleep-deprived performance on a high-fidelity flight simulator
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Behavior Research Methods, May 2006
|
| DOI | 10.3758/bf03192785 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hans P. A. Van Dongen, John A. Caldwell, J. Lynn Caldwell |
| Abstract |
Laboratory research has revealed considerable systematic variability in the degree to which individuals' alertness and performance are affected by sleep deprivation. However, little is known about whether or not different populations exhibit similar levels of individual variability. In the present study, we examined individual variability in performance impairment due to sleep loss in a highly select population of militaryjet pilots. Ten active-duty F-117 pilots were deprived of sleep for 38 h and studied repeatedly in a high-fidelity flight simulator. Data were analyzed with a mixed-model ANOVA to quantify individual variability. Statistically significant, systematic individual differences in the effects of sleep deprivation were observed, even when baseline differences were accounted for. The findings suggest that highly select populations may exhibit individual differences in vulnerability to performance impairment from sleep loss just as the general population does. Thus, the scientific and operational communities' reliance on group data as opposed to individual data may entail substantial misestimation of the impact of job-related stressors on safety and performance. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 44 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Sweden | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 43 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 18% |
| Unknown | 9 | 20% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 13 | 30% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 7 | 16% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 7% |
| Engineering | 3 | 7% |
| Sports and Recreations | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 16% |
| Unknown | 9 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 August 2018.
All research outputs
#5,446,210
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Research Methods
#739
of 2,524 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#14,894
of 83,902 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Research Methods
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,524 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 69% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 83,902 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.