The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effects of Sensory Modality and Task Duration on Performance, Workload, and Stress in Sustained Attention
Open accessAbstract
The workload and stress associated with a 40-min vigilance task were examined under conditions wherein observers monitored an auditory or a visual display for changes in signal duration. Global workload scores fell in the midrange of the NASA Task Load Index, with scores on the Frustration subscale increasing linearly over time. These effects were unrelated to the sensory modality of signals. However, sensory modality was a significant moderator variable for stress. Observers became more stressed over time as indexed by responses to the Dundee Stress State Questionnaire, with evidence of recovery in the auditory but not the visual condition toward the end of the watch. This result and the finding that signal detection accuracy - although equated for difficulty under alerted conditions - favored the auditory mode, indicate that display modality and time on task should be considered carefully in the design of operations requiring sustained attention in order to enhance performance and reduce stress. Actual or potential applications of this research include domains in which monitoring is a crucial part, such as baggage screening, security operations, medical monitoring, and power plant operations.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research
(1988) · Advances in Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0166-4115(08)62386-9 · Cited by 15,003
A Dynamic Model of Stress and Sustained Attention
Hancock, P. A. (1989) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/001872088903100503 · Cited by 874
Cited by
Vigilance Requires Hard Mental Work and Is Stressful
Warm, J. S., Parasuraman, R., & Matthews, G. (2008) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872008x312152 · Cited by 1,253
Self-citationLangner, R., & Eickhoff, S. B. (2013) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0030694 · Cited by 746
Yurko, Y. Y., Scerbo, M. W., Prabhu, A. S., Acker, C. E., & Stefanidis, D. (2010) · Simulation in Healthcare: The Journal of the Society for Simulation in Healthcare · doi:10.1097/sih.0b013e3181e3f329 · Cited by 328
Understanding “Zoom fatigue”: A mixed‐method approach
Nesher Shoshan, H., & Wehrt, W. (2022) · Applied Psychology · doi:10.1111/apps.12360 · Cited by 304
Signal salience and the mindlessness theory of vigilance
Helton, W. S., & Warm, J. S. (2008) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.04.002 · Cited by 275
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Szalma, J. L., Warm, J. S., Matthews, G., Dember, W. N., Weiler, E. M., Meier, A., & Eggemeier, F. T.
- Venue
- Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2004-06
- Volume
- 46
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 219-233
- ISSN
- 0018-7208 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-8181
- OpenAlex
- W1971647702
- Cited by
- 196
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 7.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Effects of Sensory Modality and Task Duration on Performance, Workload, and Stress in Sustained Attention. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1518/hfes.46.2.219.37334
- The paper
- Szalma, J. L., Warm, J. S., Matthews, G., Dember, W. N., Weiler, E. M., Meier, A., & Eggemeier, F. T. (2004). Effects of Sensory Modality and Task Duration on Performance, Workload, and Stress in Sustained Attention. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.2.219.37334
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.