Searching the Resource Information Network
Are you sure you want to leave this community? Leaving the community will revoke any permissions you have been granted in this community.
Mental workload (MWL) can affect human performance and is considered critical in the design and evaluation of complex human-machine systems. While numerous physiological measures are used to assess MWL, there appears no consensus on their validity as effective agents of MWL. This study was conducted to provide a comprehensive understanding of the use of physiological measures of MWL and to synthesize empirical evidence on the validity of the measures to discriminate changes in MWL. A systematical literature search was conducted with four electronic databases for empirical studies measuring MWL with physiological measures. Ninety-one studies were included for analysis. We identified 78 physiological measures, which were distributed in cardiovascular, eye movement, electroencephalogram (EEG), respiration, electromyogram (EMG) and skin categories. Cardiovascular, eye movement and EEG measures were the most widely used across varied research domains, with 76%, 66%, and 71% of times reported a significant association with MWL, respectively. While most physiological measures were found to be able to discriminate changes in MWL, they were not universally valid in all task scenarios. The use of physiological measures and their validity for MWL assessment also varied across different research domains. Our study offers insights into the understanding and selection of appropriate physiological measures for MWL assessment in varied human-machine systems.
Pubmed ID: 31366058
Publication data is provided by the National Library of Medicine ® and PubMed ®. Data is retrieved from PubMed ® on a weekly schedule. For terms and conditions see the National Library of Medicine Terms and Conditions.
A premier bibliographic database that contains over 18 million references to journal articles in life sciences with a concentration on biomedicine. A distinctive feature is that the records are indexed with NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). PubMed provides free access to MEDLINE and links to full text articles when possible. The great majority of journals are selected for MEDLINE based on the recommendation of the Literature Selection Technical Review Committee (LSTRC), an NIH-chartered advisory committee of external experts analogous to the committees that review NIH grant applications. Some additional journals and newsletters are selected based on NLM-initiated reviews, e.g., history of medicine, health services research, AIDS, toxicology and environmental health, molecular biology, and complementary medicine, that are special priorities for NLM or other NIH components. These reviews generally also involve consultation with an array of NIH and outside experts or, in some cases, external organizations with which NLM has special collaborative arrangements. MEDLINE is the primary component of PubMed, part of the Entrez series of databases provided by the NLM National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI). MEDLINE may also be searched via the NLM Gateway. Time coverage: generally 1946 to the present, with some older material. Source: Currently, citations from approximately 5,516 worldwide journals in 39 languages; 60 languages for older journals. Citations for MEDLINE are created by the NLM, international partners, and collaborating organizations.
View all literature mentionsDatabase for published, indexed resources pertaining to psychological, psychiatric and other behavioral and social science research. Users can search for resources by document type, research methodology, and funding source.
View all literature mentions