Effects of Sex and Cognitive Load on Inattentional Blindness and Reaction Time in the Traffic Context
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.7251/FLZB2223137BKeywords:
inattentional blindness, reaction time, traffic, cognitive load, sex differencesAbstract
In traffic, especially when drivers are exposed to distractors that additionally affect their cognitive resources, failure to notice important information and slow reaction are potentially dangerous. In this regard, we examined the effects of sex and cognitive load on inattentional blind ness and reaction time in an experiment from the traffic domain. The sample consisted of 279 active drivers from the territory of the Republic of Srpska, aged 19 to 55. The experiment was created on the online platform Psytoolkit and was based on determining the right of way rules. A modified version of the Mekova and Rok task was used to examine inattentional blindness – while the attention of the participants was focused on determining the right of way rule, they were unexpectedly present ed with a new stimulus, contextually connected to the traffic situation. Cognitive load is defined by the existence of an additional auditory task in one group of participants. The accuracy of the detection of a new stimulus and reaction time in determining the right of way rules were measured. The results indicate that sex affects the perception of a new stimulus. Men noticed an unexpected stimulus more often than women when their attention was focused on the traffic task. However, no sex differences were observed in the reaction time. The effect of cognitive load on inattentional blindness was also not observed. Cognitive load, on the other hand, significantly affected reaction time – participants who had an additional task reacted more slowly. The results were interpreted based on the context of the findings of previous research and were perceived in the light of their practical significance.
References
Alm, H., & Nilsson, L. (1995). The effects of a mobile telephone task on driver behaviour in a car following situation. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 27(5), 707–715. https://10.1016/0001-4575(95)00026-v
Blalock, L. D., Sawyer, B. D., Kiken, A., Gutzwiller, R. S., McGill, C. L., & Clegg, B. A. (2014). Cognitive load while driving impairs memory of moving but not stationary elements within the environment. Journal of Applied Re search in Memory and Cognition, 3(2), 95–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jar mac.2014.04.006
Bleecker, M. L., Bolla‐Wilson, K., Agnew, J., & Meyers, D. A. (1987). Simple visual reaction time: Sex and age differences. Developmental Neuropsychology, 3(2), 165–172. https://doi.org/10.1080/87565648709540372
Blough, P. M., & Slavin, L.K. (1987). Reaction time assessments of gender differences in visual-spatial performance. Perception & Psychophysics, 41(3), 276–281. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03208225
Briem, V., & Hedman, L. R. (1995). Behavioural effects of mobile telephone use during simulated driving. Ergonomics, 38(12), 2536–2562. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139508925285
Brown, I. D., Tickner, A. H. & Simmonds, D. C. V. (1969). Interference between concurrent tasks of driving and telephoning. Journal of Applied Psychology, 53(5), 419–424. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0028103
Caird, J. K., Willness, C. R., Steel, P., & Scialfa, C. (2008). A meta-analysis of the effects of cell phones on driver performance. Accident Analysis & Preventi on, 40(4), 1282–1293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2008.01.009
Consiglio, W., Driscoll, P., Witte, M., & Berg, W. P. (2003). Effect of cellular telephone conversations and other potential interference on reaction time in a braking response. Accident: Analysis and Prevention, 35(4), 495–500. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0001-4575(02)00027-1
Drews, F. A., Pasupathi, M., & Strayer, D. L. (2008). Passenger and cell phone conversations in simulated driving. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 14(4), 392–400. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013119
Engström, J., Markkula, G., Victor, T., & Merat, N. (2017). Effects of cogni tive load on driving performance: The cognitive control hypothesis. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 59(5), 734 764. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720817690639
Hannon, E. M., & Richards, A. (2010). Is inattentional blindness related to individual differences in visual working memory capacity or executive control functioning?. Perception, 39(3), 309–319. https://doi.org/10.1068/p6379
Jain, A., Bansal, R., Kumar, A., & Singh, K. D. (2015). A comparative study of visual and auditory reaction times on the basis of gender and physical activity levels of medical first year students. International journal of applied & basic medical research, 5(2), 124–127. https://doi.org/10.4103/2229-516X.157168
Kass, S. J., Cole, K. S., & Stanny, C. J. (2007). Effects of distraction and experien ce on situation awareness and simulated driving. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 10(4), 321–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. trf.2006.12.002
Kreitz, C., Furley, P., Memmert, D., & Simons, D. J. (2016). The influence of attention set, working memory capacity, and expectations on inattentional blindness. Perception, 45, 386–399. https://doi.org/10.1177/0301006615614465
Kreitz, C., Schnuerch, R., Gibbons, H., & Memmert, D. (2015). Some see it, some don’t: Exploring the relation between inattentional blindness and personality factors. PLOS ONE, 10(5), e0128158. https://10.1371/journal. pone.0128158
Mack, A. (2003). Inattentional blindness: Looking without seeing. Current Di rections in Psychological Science, 12(5), 180–184. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467 8721.01256
Mack, A., & Rock, I. (1998). Inattentional blindness. The MIT Press.
Macdonald, J. S., & Lavie, N. (2008). Load induced blindness. Journal of expe rimental psychology. Human perception and performance, 34(5), 1078–1091. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.34.5.1078
McKnight, A. J., & McKnight, A. S. (1993). The effect of cellular phone use upon driver attention. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 25(3), 259–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/0001-4575(93)90020-w
Murphy, G., & Greene, C. M. (2015). High perceptual load causes inattentional blindness and deafness in drivers. Visual Cognition, 23(7), 810–814. https://doi.org/10.1080/13506285.2015.1093245
Noble, C. E., Baker, B. L., & Jones, T. A. (1964). Age and sex parameters in psy chomotorlLearning. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 19(3), 935–945. https://doi.org/10.2466/pms.1964.19.3.935
Palmiero, M., Piccardi, L., Boccia, M., Baralla, F., Cordellieri, P., Sgalla, R., Gui doni, U., & Giannini, A. M. (2019). Neural correlates of simulated driving whi le performing a secondary task: A review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01045
Rock, I., Linnet, C. M., Grant, P. I., & Mack, A. (1992). Perception without atten tion: Results of a new method. Cognitive Psychology, 24(4), 502–534. https://doi.org/10.1016/00100285(92)90017-v
Saryazdi, R., Bak, K., & Campos, J. L. (2019). Inattentional blindness during driving in younger and older adults. Frontiers in Psychology, 10. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00880
Shelton, J., & Kumar, G. P. (2010). Comparison between auditory and visual simple reaction times. Neuroscience and Medicine, 01(01), 30–32. https://doi.org/10.4236/nm.2010.11004
Silverman, I. W. (2006). Sex differences in simple visual reaction time: A histo rical meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 54(1–2), 57–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199 006-8869-6
Simons, D. J., & Chabris, C. F. (1999). Gorillas in our midst: sustained inatten tional blindness for dynamic events. Perception, 28(9), 1059–1074. https://doi.org/10.1068/p281059
Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., & Crouch, D. J. (2006). A comparison of the cell phone driver and the drunk driver. Human factors, 48(2), 381–391. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872006777724471
Strayer, D. L., Drews, F. A., & Johnston, W. A. (2003). Cell phone-induced failures of visual attention during simulated driving. Journal of experimental psychology. Applied, 9(1), 23–32. https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-898x.9.1.23
Strayer, D. L., & Drews, F. A. (2007). Cell phone induced driver distraction. Current Directions in Psychological, 16, 128–131. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00489.x
Wickens, C. D. (2008). Multiple resources and mental workload. Human Fa ctors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 50(3), 449 455. https://10.1518/001872008x288394
Downloads
Published
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
