↓ Skip to main content

Relationship of Event-Related Potentials to the Vigilance Decrement

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
7 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
29 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
54 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Relationship of Event-Related Potentials to the Vigilance Decrement
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00237
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ashley Haubert, Matt Walsh, Rachel Boyd, Megan Morris, Megan Wiedbusch, Mike Krusmark, Glenn Gunzelmann

Abstract

Cognitive fatigue emerges in wide-ranging tasks and domains, but traditional vigilance tasks provide a well-studied context in which to explore the mechanisms underlying it. Though a variety of experimental methodologies have been used to investigate cognitive fatigue in vigilance, relatively little research has utilized electroencephalography (EEG), specifically event-related potentials (ERPs), to explore the nature of cognitive fatigue, also known as the vigilance decrement. Moreover, much of the research that has been done on vigilance and ERPs uses non-traditional vigilance paradigms, limiting generalizability to the established body of behavioral results and corresponding theories. In this study, we address concerns with prior research by (1) investigating the vigilance decrement using a well-established visual vigilance task, (2) utilizing a task designed to attenuate possible confounding ERP components present within a vigilance paradigm, and (3) informing our interpretations with recent findings from ERP research. We averaged data across electrodes located over the frontal, central, and parietal scalp. Then, we generated waveforms locked to the onset of critical low-frequency or non-critical high-frequency events during a 40 min task that was segregated into time blocks for data analysis. There were three primary findings from the analyses of these data. First, mean amplitude of N1 was greater during later blocks for both low-frequency and high-frequency events, a contradictory finding compared to past visual vigilance studies that is further discussed with respect to current interpretations of the N1 in visual attention tasks. Second, P3b mean amplitude following low-frequency events was reduced during later blocks, with a later onset latency. Third and finally, the decrease in P3b amplitude correlated with individual differences in the magnitude of the vigilance decrement, assessed using d'. The results provide evidence for degradations of cognitive processing efficiency brought on by extended time on task, leading to delayed processing and decreased discriminability of critical stimuli from non-critical stimuli. These conclusions are discussed in the context of the vigilance decrement and corresponding theoretical accounts.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 7 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 54 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 28%
Student > Master 11 20%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Student > Postgraduate 4 7%
Other 4 7%
Unknown 9 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 24%
Engineering 8 15%
Neuroscience 6 11%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 14 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 14 April 2018.
All research outputs
#7,231,125
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#10,405
of 30,282 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#127,105
of 331,971 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#289
of 576 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,282 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% 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 331,971 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 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 576 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.