Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Szalma, J. L.
Right arrow Articles by Parsons, K. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Szalma, J. L.
Right arrow Articles by Parsons, K. S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Training for Vigilance: Using Predictive Power to Evaluate Feedback Effectiveness

James L. Szalma

University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida

Peter A. Hancock

University of Central Florida, Orlando, Florida

Joel S. Warm

University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio

William N. Dember

University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio

Kelley S. Parsons

University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio

Objective: We examined the effects of knowledge of results (KR) on vigilance accuracy and report the first use of positive and negative predictive power (PPP and NPP) to assess vigilance training effectiveness. Background: Training individuals to detect infrequent signals among a plethora of nonsignals is critical to success in many failure-intolerant monitoring technologies. KR has been widely used for vigilance training, but the effect of the schedule of KR presentation on accuracy has been neglected. Previous research on training for vigilance has used signal detection metrics or hits and false alarms. In this study diagnosticity measures were applied to augment traditional analytic methods. Method: We examined the effects of continuous KR and a partial-KR regimen versus a no-KR control on decision diagnosticity. Results: Signal detection theory (SDT) analysis indicated that KR induced conservatism in responding but did not enhance sensitivity. However, KR in both forms equally enhanced PPP while selectively impairing NPP. Conclusion: There is a trade-off in the effectiveness of KR in reducing false alarms and misses. Together, SDT and PPP/NPP measures provide a more complete portrait of performance effects. Application: PPP and NPP together provide another assessment technique for vigilance performance, and as additional diagnostic tools, these measures are potentially useful to the human factors community.

Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Vol. 48, No. 4, 682-692 (2006)
DOI: 10.1518/001872006779166343
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?