Conscious thought and the sustained attention to response task

Helton, William S.; Kern, Rosalie P.; Walker, Donieka R.

doi:10.1016/j.concog.2009.06.002

Cited by 90 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…That is, it has been observed that when participants speed up, they make more errors, and when they slow down, they make fewer errors (e.g., Head et al, 2012;Helton et al, 2009;Peebles & Bothell, 2004;Seli et al, 2012b). Although these data certainly suggest that speed-accuracy trade-offs exist, given the correlational nature of the data, a number of other variables may also contribute to this outcome.…”

mentioning

confidence: 74%

“…However, despite this longstanding issue, it appears that researchers concerned with sustained attention and, in particular, with sustained-attention training, have not typically considered the potential impact of speedaccuracy trade-offs on the results of their studies using the SART. Furthermore, as far as we know, while the possible role of speed-accuracy trade-offs in the SART has been identified before (Helton, 2009;Helton et al, 2009;Peebles & Bothell, 2004), no one examining sustained attention performance using the SART has yet manipulated response delay independently of individual differences in criterion setting, in order to evaluate speed-accuracy tradeoffs.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Here we explore the role of this this well-known experimental confound in studies using the SART as a measure of sustained attention. The sustained-attention literature using the SART has indeed seen its fair share of debates over the extent to which performance is reflective of differences in choices regarding where to respond along the speed-accuracy trade-off curve (see Helton, 2009;Helton et al, 2009;Peebles & Bothell, 2004;Seli et al, 2012b). However, despite this longstanding issue, it appears that researchers concerned with sustained attention and, in particular, with sustained-attention training, have not typically considered the potential impact of speedaccuracy trade-offs on the results of their studies using the SART.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, it is sometimes unclear from these studies whether even these modest reductions in errors are truly due to improved sustained attention, or whether they are the result of strategic changes in responding along the speed-accuracy trade-off curve (cf. Helton, 2009;Helton, Kern, & Walker, 2009). This particular concern applies primarily to studies using the SART rather than to those using more traditional go-no-go tasks.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Together with others (Helton, 2009;Helton et al, 2009), we assume that in the context of the SART it is in principle possible to separate the influences of sustained attention from strategic shifts along the speed-accuracy dimension. While it is possible to explain speed-accuracy trade-offs using the concept of "attention"-for instance, positing that shifts along the speed-accuracy trade-off curve reflect strategic shifts in attention, either to generating a motor response (i.e., speed) or to stimulus identification (i.e., accuracy; we thank a reviewer for raising this possibility)-this is not the type of "attention" that researchers have referred to when using the SART.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

A methodological note on evaluating performance in a sustained-attention-to-response task

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We evaluated the influence of speed-accuracy trade-offs on performance in the sustained attention to response task (SART), a task often used to evaluate the effectiveness of techniques designed to improve sustained attention. In the present study, we experimentally manipulated response delay in a variation of the SART and found that commission errors, which are commonly used as an index of lapses in sustained attention, were a systematic function of manipulated differences in response delay. Delaying responses to roughly 800 ms after stimulus onset reduced commission errors substantially. We suggest the possibility that any technique that affects response speed will indirectly alter error rates independently of improvements in sustained attention. Investigators therefore need to carefully explore, report, and correct for changes in response speed that accompany improvements in performance or, alternatively, to employ tasks that control for response speed.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 74%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

A methodological note on evaluating performance in a sustained-attention-to-response task

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Reliable- and unreliable-warning cues in the Sustained Attention to Response Task

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The Sustained Attention to Response Task (SART) is a Go-No-Go signal detection task developed to measure lapses of attention. In this study, we examined the impact that warning signals, reliable and unreliable, have on SART performance. Eighteen participants performed a no-warning, reliable-warning, or unreliable-warning SART. Response times were faster, errors of commission lower, but errors of omission higher in the reliable-warning SART in comparison with the no-warning or unreliable-warning SART. There was a significant negative correlation between participants' errors of commission rate and their response times in the unreliable-warning and no-warning SART. This correlation was reduced in the reliable-warning SART. Making the task perceptually easier reduces the errors of commission, in contradiction to the mindlessness perspective, and reduces the speed-accuracy trade-off. These results, overall, support the view that the SART is primarily a measure of response strategy, not sustained attention per se.

show abstract

Text-speak processing and the sustained attention to response task

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examined performance in a sustained attention to response task (SART) (Experiment 1) and a more traditionally formatted vigilance task (Experiment 2) using novel word stimuli (text-speak) and normally spelt words. This enabled us to address whether the SART is a better measure of sustained attention or of response strategy, and to investigate the cognitive demands of text-speak processing. In Experiment 1, 72 participants completed a subset (text-speak) and a word SART, as well as a self-reported text experience questionnaire. Those who reported more proficiency and experience with text-speak made more errors on the subset SART, but this appeared to be due to their increase in response speed. This did not occur in the word SART. In Experiment 2, 14 participants completed high No-Go, low-Go (more traditional response format) versions of these tasks to further investigate the cognitive demands of text-speak processing. Response latency increased over periods of watch only for the text-speak task, not for the word task. The results of Experiment 1 support the perspective that the SART is highly sensitive to response strategy, and the results of both experiments together indicate target detection tasks may be a novel way of investigating the cognitive demands of text-speak processing.

show abstract

Conscious thought and the sustained attention to response task

Cited by 90 publications

References 43 publications

A methodological note on evaluating performance in a sustained-attention-to-response task

A methodological note on evaluating performance in a sustained-attention-to-response task

Reliable- and unreliable-warning cues in the Sustained Attention to Response Task

Text-speak processing and the sustained attention to response task

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About