Literature DB >> 28140793

Quantification of baseline pupillary response and task-evoked pupillary response during constant and incremental task load.

Prithima R Mosaly1,2, Lukasz M Mazur1,2, Lawrence B Marks1.   

Abstract

The methods employed to quantify the baseline pupil size and task-evoked pupillary response (TEPR) may affect the overall study results. To test this hypothesis, the objective of this study was to assess variability in baseline pupil size and TEPR during two basic working memory tasks: constant load of 3-letters memorisation-recall (10 trials), and incremental load memorisation-recall (two trials of each load level), using two commonly used methods (1) change from trail/load specific baseline, (2) change from constant baseline. Results indicated that there was a significant shift in baseline between the trails for constant load, and between the load levels for incremental load. The TEPR was independent of shifts in baseline using method 1 only for constant load, and method 2 only for higher levels of incremental load condition. These important findings suggest that the assessment of both the baseline and methods to quantify TEPR are critical in ergonomics application, especially in studies with small number of trials per subject per condition. Practitioner Summary: Quantification of TEPR can be affected by shifts in baseline pupil size that are most likely affected by non-cognitive factors when other external factors are kept constant. Therefore, quantification methods employed to compute both baseline and TEPR are critical in understanding the information processing of humans in practical ergonomics settings.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cognitive workload; baseline pupil size; task evoked pupillary response (TEPR); working memory

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28140793     DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2017.1288930

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ergonomics        ISSN: 0014-0139            Impact factor:   2.778


  3 in total

1.  Sensor-based indicators of performance changes between sessions during robotic surgery training.

Authors:  Chuhao Wu; Jackie Cha; Jay Sulek; Chandru P Sundaram; Juan Wachs; Robert W Proctor; Denny Yu
Journal:  Appl Ergon       Date:  2020-09-19       Impact factor: 3.661

2.  Assessment of Radiation Therapy Technologists' Workload and Situation Awareness: Monitoring 2 Versus 3 Collocated Display Monitors.

Authors:  Joseph K Nuamah; Prithima R Mosaly; Robert Adams; Kathik Adapa; Bhisham S Chera; Lawrence B Marks; Lukasz M Mazur
Journal:  Adv Radiat Oncol       Date:  2020-09-28

3.  Eye-Tracking Metrics Predict Perceived Workload in Robotic Surgical Skills Training.

Authors:  Chuhao Wu; Jackie Cha; Jay Sulek; Tian Zhou; Chandru P Sundaram; Juan Wachs; Denny Yu
Journal:  Hum Factors       Date:  2019-09-27       Impact factor: 2.888

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.