Affiliation:
1. Wright State University, Dayton, Ohio
2. Armstrong Laboratory, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio
Abstract
Subjective workload assessment is one of the most frequently used tools for system evaluation. However, little is known about which factors contribute to the sensitivity, validity, and reliability of subjective workload ratings. One major classification of subjective workload assessment tools is based on relative judgments of the workload of different task conditions. The present research evaluated different approaches to relative subjective workload assessment in terms of their sensitivity to demand manipulations, concurrent validity with performance, and test-retest reliability. Results indicated that performing relative judgments retrospectively after having experienced all task conditions was superior to rating each task condition immediately after performing it. Further, redundant relative comparisons may produce more sensitive ratings than do relative comparisons to a single reference task. Overall, the results support the use of retrospective relative workload judgments as an evaluation tool.
Subject
Behavioral Neuroscience,Applied Psychology,Human Factors and Ergonomics
Cited by
20 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Comparison of In-Flight and Post-Flight Use of NASA-TLX;Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors;2024-03
2. Weight watchers: NASA-TLX weights revisited;Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science;2021-11-17
3. Cognitive Load Measurement and Impact Analysis on Performance in Dual-task Situations;Proceedings of the 2020 The 2nd World Symposium on Software Engineering;2020-09-25
4. Workload and fatigue;Space Safety and Human Performance;2018
5. A Multilevel Approach to Relating Subjective Workload to Performance After Shifts in Task Demand;Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society;2014-05-06