MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078466836 · doi:10.1080/00140139.2010.489960

Sensitivity and diagnosticity of NASA-TLX and simplified SWAT to assess the mental workload associated with operating an agricultural sprayer

2010· article· en· W2078466836 on OpenAlexaff
A. K. Dey, Danny Mann

Bibliographic record

VenueErgonomics · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsWorkloadSensitivity (control systems)Principal component analysisTask (project management)StatisticsSimulationComputer scienceEngineeringMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objectives of the present study were: a) to investigate three continuous variants of the NASA-Task Load Index (TLX) (standard NASA (CNASA), average NASA (C1NASA) and principal component NASA (PCNASA)) and five different variants of the simplified subjective workload assessment technique (SSWAT) (continuous standard SSWAT (CSSWAT), continuous average SSWAT (C1SSWAT), continuous principal component SSWAT (PCSSWAT), discrete event-based SSWAT (D1SSWAT) and discrete standard SSWAT (DSSWAT)) in terms of their sensitivity and diagnosticity to assess the mental workload associated with agricultural spraying; b) to compare and select the best variants of NASA-TLX and SSWAT for future mental workload research in the agricultural domain. A total of 16 male university students (mean 30.4 +/- 12.5 years) participated in this study. All the participants were trained to drive an agricultural spraying simulator. Sensitivity was assessed by the ability of the scales to report the maximum change in workload ratings due to the change in illumination and difficulty levels. In addition, the factor loading method was used to quantify sensitivity. The diagnosticity was assessed by the ability of the scale to diagnose the change in task levels from single to dual. Among all the variants of NASA-TLX and SSWAT, PCNASA and discrete variants of SSWAT showed the highest sensitivity and diagnosticity. Moreover, among all the variants of NASA and SSWAT, the discrete variants of SSWAT showed the highest sensitivity and diagnosticity but also high between-subject variability. The continuous variants of both scales had relatively low sensitivity and diagnosticity and also low between-subject variability. Hence, when selecting a scale for future mental workload research in the agricultural domain, a researcher should decide what to compromise: 1) between-subject variability or 2) sensitivity and diagnosticity. STATEMENT OF RELEVANCE: The use of subjective workload scales is very popular in mental workload research. The present study investigated the different variants of two popular workload rating scales (i.e. NASA-TLX and SSWAT) in terms of their sensitivity and diagnositicity and selected the best variants of each scale for future mental workload research.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.036
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.036
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.293 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueErgonomicsSame topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207