Advertisement

On Mental Load and Reduced Mental Capacity: Some Considerations Concerning Laboratory Research and Field Investigations

  • Mathijs Soede
Part of the NATO Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 8)

Summary

This paper presents some reflections about the problem of mental load and the measurement of the level of mental load. A general model of the relation between mental control, effort and performance is given. Some observations are made regarding the notion of mental capacity.

The model proposed is suggested to be applicable in the particular man-machine situation of an arm amputee patient using a prosthesis. Pilot experiments with the aim to develop methods to measure the control effort in using a prosthesis is given as an example of the application of mental load measures.

At the end of this paper some questions are raised as to the factors which may restrain progress in mental load research.

Keywords

Human Operator Task Analysis Secondary Task Dual Task Mental Effort 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Soede, M., H.G. Stassen & J.F. Coeterier. Time analysis of the Tasks of Approach Controllers in ATC. Ergonomics 14 (1971) 591–602.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Soede, M., & J.F. Coeterier. Investigations in an automobile grinding room. Internal report TNO (Dutch)(1971).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Soede, M., J.S.M.J. Van Dieten & H.G. Stassen. On the acceptance, functional gain and mental load in arm prosthesis and orthosis control; report. Delft, Delft Univ. of Techn., Dept. of Mech. Eng., WTHD 66 (1974) 17 pp.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Stassen, H.G., J.S.M.J. Van Dieten & M. Soede. On the mental load in relation to the acceptance of arm prosthesis. In: preprints 6th World Congress of the International Federation of Automatic Control, Boston/Cambridge (1975). Paper 40. 1. 8 pp.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stassen, H.G. (ed.) Progress Report. Jan. 1973 until July 1976 of the Man-Machine Systems Group. Delft, Univ. of Techn., Dept. of Mech. Eng., WTHD 95 (1977), Ch. IX-XIII, pp. 164–223.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grandjean, E. Introductory remarks at the symposium. In: K. Hashimoto et al. (eds.) Proceedings of Methodology in human fatigue assessment symposium, Kyoto, Japan (1969) London, Taylor Francis. 14 pp.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McFarland, R.A. Understanding Fatigue in Modern Life. In: Hashimoto et al. (eds.). Proceedings of Methodology in human fatigue assessment symposium, Kyoto, Japan (1969). London, Taylor Francis. pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rolfe, J.M. The measurement of human response in man-vehicle control situations. In: T.B. Sheridan & G. Johannsen (eds.). Monitoring behavior and supervisory control. New York, Plenum Press. pp. 125–138.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Spyker, D.A., S.P. Stackhouse, A.S. Khalafalla & R.C. McLane. Development of techniques for measuring pilot work load. NASA CR-1888 (1970). 109 pp.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Vollmar, R. The dual task method in evaluation of spare capacity. Delft, Delft Univ. of Techn., Lab, for Measurement and Control (1976) S-170. 45 pp. M.Sc. thesis (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gigch, J.P. Van. The physical and mental load components of objective complexity in production systems. Behavioral Science 21 (1976) 490–498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Philipp, U., D. Reiche & J.H. Kirchner. The use of subjective rating. Ergonomics 14 (1971) 611–616.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kahneman, D. Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. Prentice Hall (1973). 246 pp.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kalsbeek, J.W.H. & J.H. Ettema. Physiological and psychological evaluation of distraction stress. Ergonomics, Proceedings of 2nd I.E.A. Congress, Dortmund, 1964.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tsaneva, N., & S. Markov. A model of fatigue. In: K. Hashimoto et al. (eds.) Proceedings of Methodology in human fatigue assessment symposium, Kyoto, Japan (1969). London, Taylor Francis, pp. 11–16.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Blom, J.L. L’influence de la charge mentale sur les potentiels évoqués. Le Travail Humain 37 (1974) 139–212.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cbmen, P.M.F. Investigation in mental load due to the control of an arm prosthesis. Delft, Delft Univ. of Techn., Lab.for Measurement and Control (1973) Ae-812. 57 pp. M.Sc. thesis (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kalsbeek, J.W.H. Mesure objective de la surcharge mentale; nouvelles applications de la méthode des doubles tâches. Le Travail Humain 28 (1965) 121–132.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bertelson, P., A. Renkin, D. Lemye & G. Taverne. L’évaluation de la capacité résiduelle par la méthode de la tâche ajoutée. Bruxelles, Univ., Libre de Bruxelles, Lab. de Psychologie, Dépt. de Psychologie expérimentale (1973). 170 pp.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jex, H.R., J.D. McDonnell & A.V. Phatak. A “critical” tracking task for manual control research. IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics. Vol. HFE-7 (1966) 138–145.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    McRuer, D.T. & H.R. Jex. A review of quasi-linear pilot models. IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics. Vol. HFE-8 (1967) 231–249.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pítkin, E.T., & E.W. Vinjé. Evaluation of human operator aural and visual displays with the Critical Tracking Task. In: Proceedings of the 8th Annual conference on manual control, (1972). AFFDL-TR-72–92, pp. 553–559.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vermeulen, J. Investigation of the possibilities of measuring the control effort of an arm prosthesis. Delft, Delft Univ. of Techn. Lab. for Measurement and Control (1974) A-187. 77 pp. M.Sc. thesis (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Elias. M.E. Investigation in task analysis as a method to measure the control effort of an arm prosthesis. Delft, Delft Univ. of Techn. Lab. for Measurement and Control (1974) A-15. 58 pp. M.Sc. thesis (in Dutch).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kalsbeek, J.W.H. Standards of acceptable load in ATC tasks. Ergonomics 14 (1971) 641–650.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hess, R.A. Nonadjectival rating scales in human response experimments. Human Factors 15 (1973) 275–280.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    McDonnell, J.D. Pilot rating techniques for the estimation and evaluation of handling qualities (1968). AFFDL-TR-68–76, pp. 198.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1979

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mathijs Soede
    • 1
  1. 1.Netherlands Institute for Preventive MedicineLeidenNetherlands

Personalised recommendations