Cited by 422Mind wandering and attentionSleep and Work-Related FatigueHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety

Psychophysiological investigation of vigilance decrement: boredom or cognitive fatigue?

Pattyn, Nathalie, Neyt, Xavier, Henderickx, David, Soetens, Eric·2008·Physiology & Behavior

Abstract

The vigilance decrement has been described as a slowing in reaction times or an increase in error rates as an effect of time-on-task during tedious monitoring tasks. This decrement has been alternatively ascribed to either withdrawal of the supervisory attentional system, due to underarousal caused by the insufficient workload, or to a decreased attentional capacity and thus the impossibility to sustain mental effort. Furthermore, it has previously been reported that controlled processing is the locus of the vigilance decrement. This study aimed at answering three questions, to better define sustained attention. First, is endogenous attention more vulnerable to time-on-task than exogenous attention? Second, do measures of autonomic arousal provide evidence to support the underload vs overload hypothesis? And third, do these measures show a different effect for endogenous and exogenous attention? We applied a cued (valid vs invalid) conjunction search task, and ECG and respiration recordings were used to compute sympathetic (normalized low frequency power) and parasympathetic tone (respiratory sinus arrhythmia, RSA). Behavioural results showed a dual effect of time-on-task: the usually described vigilance decrement, expressed as increased reaction times (RTs) after 30 min for both conditions; and a higher cost in RTs after invalid cues for the endogenous condition only, appearing after 60 min. Physiological results clearly support the underload hypothesis to subtend the vigilance decrement, since heart period and RSA increased over time-on-task. There was no physiological difference between the endogenous and exogenous conditions. Subjective experience of participants was more compatible with boredom than with high mental effort.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.physbeh.2007.09.016

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Psycho-physiological measurements have been used to assess mental effort, to measure user experiences in entertainment technologies, and in human-robot interaction.

    “This method has been used to assess mental effort [26-29], to measure user experiences in entertainment technologies [30], and in human robot interaction [31,32].”
  • Higher alpha suppression is associated with increased task difficulty in a simultaneous dual task of tracking and mental arithmetic.

    “in [26] the results showed a higher alpha suppression for increased task difficulty in a simultaneous dual task of tracking and mental arithmetic.”
  • Increased HR, BP, (nor)adrenaline and decreased HRV have been regularly reported as compensatory regulation or effort to maintain successful performance.

    “Indeed, increased HR, BP, (nor)adrenaline and decreased HRV have been regularly reported as compensatory regulation or effort to maintain successful performance in several studies (e.g., Tattersall and Hockey, 1995; Tafalla and Evans, 1997; Pattyn et al., 2008; Hockey et al., 2009; Thayer and Lane, 2009; Grassmann et al., 2017).”

    From Voice Stress Analysis: A New Framework for Voice and Effort in Human Performance (2018) · cites this paper as Pattyn et al., 2008

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Pattyn, N., Neyt, X., Henderickx, D., & Soetens, E.
Affiliations
  • Vrije Universiteit Brussel (BE)
  • Royal Military Academy (BE)
Corresponding author
Pattyn, Nathalie
Venue
Physiology & Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-01
Volume
93
Issue
1-2
Pages
369-378
ISSN
0031-9384 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2086210198
Cited by
422
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 22 · 2025: 48 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 28 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 19 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 32 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 13
FWCI
3.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Physiology & Behavior (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • VUBIR (Vrije Universiteit Brussel) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Mind wandering and attention
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and Work-Related Fatigue
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Keywords
vigilance decrement, time on task, sustained attention, top-down attention, bottom-up attention, autonomic arousal, sympathetic nervous system, parasympathetic activity, respiratory sinus arrhythmia, heart period, conjunction search, reaction time, boredom, cognitive effort
MeSH terms
Adult, Analysis of Variance, Arousal, Attention, Autonomic Nervous System, Boredom, Cognition, Fatigue, Humans, Psychophysics, Reaction Time, Time Factors, Workload

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review