{"title":"Three-dimensional (3D) stimuli are always better than two-dimensional (2D) multi-tasking? A high cognitive load in 3D-MATB-II","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.bbr.2024.115322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>The objective of this study is to investigate the whether multi-tasking performance in (three-dimensional) 3D aid or impede cognition compare to (two-dimensional) 2D environments, as reflected by cognitive load. Specifically, we aim to examine the mechanism of multi-tasking under 3D (virtual reality [VR]) and 2D (PC monitor) conditions using the widely used Multi-Attribute Task Battery (MATB) II paradigm.</div></div><div><h3>Methodology</h3><div>The MATB-II sub-tasks, namely “Tracking” and “System Monitoring,” were conducted with varying task demands in both 3D conditions (Tracking Far - System Monitoring Near [TF-SN], Tracking Near - System Monitoring Far [TN-SF]) and a 2D condition with no depth perception (No Depth [ND]). Participants' cognitive load was assessed using subjective reporting (NASA-TLX) and physiological measure (root mean square of successive difference (RMSSD) of heart rate variability (HRV)).</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>The study found that performance was significantly better in the ND condition compared to the TF-SN and TN-SF conditions. Furthermore, higher NASA-TLX scores and lower RMSSD values were observed in the TF-SN and TN-SN conditions compared to the ND condition, providing additional support for the overall findings of the MATB-II paradigm.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>These findings suggest that processing multiple tasks in different depth planes may lead to poorer performance and increased subjective and physiological cognitive load.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":8823,"journal":{"name":"Behavioural Brain Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Behavioural Brain Research","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166432824004789","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective
The objective of this study is to investigate the whether multi-tasking performance in (three-dimensional) 3D aid or impede cognition compare to (two-dimensional) 2D environments, as reflected by cognitive load. Specifically, we aim to examine the mechanism of multi-tasking under 3D (virtual reality [VR]) and 2D (PC monitor) conditions using the widely used Multi-Attribute Task Battery (MATB) II paradigm.
Methodology
The MATB-II sub-tasks, namely “Tracking” and “System Monitoring,” were conducted with varying task demands in both 3D conditions (Tracking Far - System Monitoring Near [TF-SN], Tracking Near - System Monitoring Far [TN-SF]) and a 2D condition with no depth perception (No Depth [ND]). Participants' cognitive load was assessed using subjective reporting (NASA-TLX) and physiological measure (root mean square of successive difference (RMSSD) of heart rate variability (HRV)).
Results
The study found that performance was significantly better in the ND condition compared to the TF-SN and TN-SF conditions. Furthermore, higher NASA-TLX scores and lower RMSSD values were observed in the TF-SN and TN-SN conditions compared to the ND condition, providing additional support for the overall findings of the MATB-II paradigm.
Conclusion
These findings suggest that processing multiple tasks in different depth planes may lead to poorer performance and increased subjective and physiological cognitive load.
期刊介绍:
Behavioural Brain Research is an international, interdisciplinary journal dedicated to the publication of articles in the field of behavioural neuroscience, broadly defined. Contributions from the entire range of disciplines that comprise the neurosciences, behavioural sciences or cognitive sciences are appropriate, as long as the goal is to delineate the neural mechanisms underlying behaviour. Thus, studies may range from neurophysiological, neuroanatomical, neurochemical or neuropharmacological analysis of brain-behaviour relations, including the use of molecular genetic or behavioural genetic approaches, to studies that involve the use of brain imaging techniques, to neuroethological studies. Reports of original research, of major methodological advances, or of novel conceptual approaches are all encouraged. The journal will also consider critical reviews on selected topics.