附加任务对模拟汽车驾驶中制动反应时间的影响:超越 PRP 效应。

IF 2.2 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-06-24 DOI:10.1007/s00426-024-01988-z
Robert Stojan, Otmar Bock, Melanie Mack, Claudia Voelcker-Rehage
{"title":"附加任务对模拟汽车驾驶中制动反应时间的影响:超越 PRP 效应。","authors":"Robert Stojan, Otmar Bock, Melanie Mack, Claudia Voelcker-Rehage","doi":"10.1007/s00426-024-01988-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The presentation of one task increases the reaction time on a subsequent task, if stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between tasks is short. This psychological refractory period (PRP) effect is typically leveling off as SOA approaches 1 s, which has been documented both in classical laboratory paradigms and in simulated car driving. Here we report a more persistent effect on the subsequent task that goes well beyond the typical duration of the PRP effect. In a driving simulator, 120 healthy older participants followed a lead car that mostly drove at a constant speed. They had to maintain a regular distance from the lead car and had to brake when the lead car braked. Participants also engaged in several additional tasks during driving (two types of tasks: typing three-digit numbers, stating arguments on public issues). SOA between the braking task and the last preceding additional task was 11.49 s ± 1.99 (mean and standard deviation). In a control condition, the braking task was administered without additional tasks. Main performance outcome was Braking Reaction Time (RT, in s), as the interval between onset of brake lights of the lead car and the moment participants released the gas pedal. Additionally, foot movement time (MT, in s), i.e., the difference between gas pedal release and brake pedal onset, was considered for possible compensation behavior. Inter-vehicle distance to the lead car (in m) was taken into account as a moderator. We found that RT averaged 0.77 s without additional tasks, but averaged 1.45 s with additional tasks. This RT difference was less pronounced at smaller inter-vehicle distances, and was not compensated for by faster MT from the gas pedal to the brake pedal. We conclude that detrimental effects of additional tasks on subsequent braking responses can be more persistent than suggested by the PRP effect, possibly because of maintaining multiple task sets, requiring increased executive control. We further conclude that potential detrimental effects can be ameliorated at small inter-vehicle distances by mobilizing extra cognitive resources when response urgency is higher. As a practical implication of our study, distracting stimuli can have persisting detrimental effects on traffic safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":48184,"journal":{"name":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of additional tasks on the reaction time of braking responses in simulated car driving: beyond the PRP effect.\",\"authors\":\"Robert Stojan, Otmar Bock, Melanie Mack, Claudia Voelcker-Rehage\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00426-024-01988-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The presentation of one task increases the reaction time on a subsequent task, if stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between tasks is short. This psychological refractory period (PRP) effect is typically leveling off as SOA approaches 1 s, which has been documented both in classical laboratory paradigms and in simulated car driving. Here we report a more persistent effect on the subsequent task that goes well beyond the typical duration of the PRP effect. In a driving simulator, 120 healthy older participants followed a lead car that mostly drove at a constant speed. They had to maintain a regular distance from the lead car and had to brake when the lead car braked. Participants also engaged in several additional tasks during driving (two types of tasks: typing three-digit numbers, stating arguments on public issues). SOA between the braking task and the last preceding additional task was 11.49 s ± 1.99 (mean and standard deviation). In a control condition, the braking task was administered without additional tasks. Main performance outcome was Braking Reaction Time (RT, in s), as the interval between onset of brake lights of the lead car and the moment participants released the gas pedal. Additionally, foot movement time (MT, in s), i.e., the difference between gas pedal release and brake pedal onset, was considered for possible compensation behavior. Inter-vehicle distance to the lead car (in m) was taken into account as a moderator. We found that RT averaged 0.77 s without additional tasks, but averaged 1.45 s with additional tasks. This RT difference was less pronounced at smaller inter-vehicle distances, and was not compensated for by faster MT from the gas pedal to the brake pedal. We conclude that detrimental effects of additional tasks on subsequent braking responses can be more persistent than suggested by the PRP effect, possibly because of maintaining multiple task sets, requiring increased executive control. We further conclude that potential detrimental effects can be ameliorated at small inter-vehicle distances by mobilizing extra cognitive resources when response urgency is higher. As a practical implication of our study, distracting stimuli can have persisting detrimental effects on traffic safety.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48184,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-01988-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological Research-Psychologische Forschung","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-024-01988-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

如果任务之间的刺激起始不同步(SOA)时间较短,则一个任务的呈现会增加后续任务的反应时间。这种心理折射期(PRP)效应通常在 SOA 接近 1 秒时趋于平缓,这在经典的实验室范例和模拟汽车驾驶中都有记录。在这里,我们报告了一种对后续任务更持久的影响,这种影响远远超过了 PRP 效应的典型持续时间。在驾驶模拟器中,120 名健康的老年参与者跟随一辆主要以恒定速度行驶的领头车。他们必须与领头车保持一定距离,并在领头车刹车时制动。在驾驶过程中,参与者还需要完成几项额外的任务(两类任务:输入三位数的数字,就公共问题发表论点)。制动任务与最后一项附加任务之间的时间间隔为 11.49 秒 ± 1.99(平均值和标准偏差)。在对照组条件下,制动任务没有附加任务。主要成绩结果是制动反应时间(RT,单位为秒),即前车制动灯亮起与参与者松开油门踏板之间的时间间隔。此外,脚部移动时间(MT,秒),即松开油门踏板与踩下制动踏板之间的时间差,也被视为可能的补偿行为。车辆与前车之间的距离(单位:米)作为调节因素也被考虑在内。我们发现,在没有额外任务的情况下,RT 平均为 0.77 秒,但在有额外任务的情况下,RT 平均为 1.45 秒。在车距较小的情况下,这种 RT 差异并不明显,而且从油门踏板到制动踏板的 MT 速度更快也无法弥补这种 RT 差异。我们得出结论,额外任务对后续制动反应的不利影响可能比 PRP 效应所显示的更为持久,这可能是因为维持多个任务集需要更多的执行控制。我们进一步得出结论,在车辆间距离较小的情况下,当反应紧迫性较高时,通过调动额外的认知资源,可以改善潜在的不利影响。我们研究的一个实际意义是,分散注意力的刺激会对交通安全产生持续的不利影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Effect of additional tasks on the reaction time of braking responses in simulated car driving: beyond the PRP effect.

The presentation of one task increases the reaction time on a subsequent task, if stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between tasks is short. This psychological refractory period (PRP) effect is typically leveling off as SOA approaches 1 s, which has been documented both in classical laboratory paradigms and in simulated car driving. Here we report a more persistent effect on the subsequent task that goes well beyond the typical duration of the PRP effect. In a driving simulator, 120 healthy older participants followed a lead car that mostly drove at a constant speed. They had to maintain a regular distance from the lead car and had to brake when the lead car braked. Participants also engaged in several additional tasks during driving (two types of tasks: typing three-digit numbers, stating arguments on public issues). SOA between the braking task and the last preceding additional task was 11.49 s ± 1.99 (mean and standard deviation). In a control condition, the braking task was administered without additional tasks. Main performance outcome was Braking Reaction Time (RT, in s), as the interval between onset of brake lights of the lead car and the moment participants released the gas pedal. Additionally, foot movement time (MT, in s), i.e., the difference between gas pedal release and brake pedal onset, was considered for possible compensation behavior. Inter-vehicle distance to the lead car (in m) was taken into account as a moderator. We found that RT averaged 0.77 s without additional tasks, but averaged 1.45 s with additional tasks. This RT difference was less pronounced at smaller inter-vehicle distances, and was not compensated for by faster MT from the gas pedal to the brake pedal. We conclude that detrimental effects of additional tasks on subsequent braking responses can be more persistent than suggested by the PRP effect, possibly because of maintaining multiple task sets, requiring increased executive control. We further conclude that potential detrimental effects can be ameliorated at small inter-vehicle distances by mobilizing extra cognitive resources when response urgency is higher. As a practical implication of our study, distracting stimuli can have persisting detrimental effects on traffic safety.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
8.70%
发文量
137
期刊介绍: Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung publishes articles that contribute to a basic understanding of human perception, attention, memory, and action. The Journal is devoted to the dissemination of knowledge based on firm experimental ground, but not to particular approaches or schools of thought. Theoretical and historical papers are welcome to the extent that they serve this general purpose; papers of an applied nature are acceptable if they contribute to basic understanding or serve to bridge the often felt gap between basic and applied research in the field covered by the Journal.
期刊最新文献
Correction: How do emotions respond to outcome values and influence choice? The ownership memory self-reference effect shifts recognition criterion but not recognition sensitivity. Effect of additional tasks on the reaction time of braking responses in simulated car driving: beyond the PRP effect. Impact of aging on crossmodal attention switching. A kinematically complex multi-articular motor skill for investigating implicit motor learning.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1