» Articles » PMID: 27064669

Cue Utilization and Cognitive Load in Novel Task Performance

Overview
Journal Front Psychol
Date 2016 Apr 12
PMID 27064669
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This study was designed to examine whether differences in cue utilization were associated with differences in performance during a novel, simulated rail control task, and whether these differences reflected a reduction in cognitive load. Two experiments were conducted, the first of which involved the completion of a 20-min rail control simulation that required participants to re-route trains that periodically required a diversion. Participants with a greater level of cue utilization recorded a consistently greater response latency, consistent with a strategy that maintained accuracy, but reduced the demands on cognitive resources. In the second experiment, participants completed the rail task, during which a concurrent, secondary task was introduced. The results revealed an interaction, whereby participants with lesser levels of cue utilization recorded an increase in response latency that exceeded the response latency recorded for participants with greater levels of cue utilization. The relative consistency of response latencies for participants with greater levels of cue utilization, across all blocks, despite the imposition of a secondary task, suggested that those participants with greater levels of cue utilization had adopted a strategy that was effectively minimizing the impact of additional sources of cognitive load on their performance.

Citing Articles

Challenging Cognitive Load Theory: The Role of Educational Neuroscience and Artificial Intelligence in Redefining Learning Efficacy.

Gkintoni E, Antonopoulou H, Sortwell A, Halkiopoulos C Brain Sci. 2025; 15(2).

PMID: 40002535 PMC: 11852728. DOI: 10.3390/brainsci15020203.


Individual differences in selective attention and engagement shape students' learning from visual cues and instructor presence during online lessons.

King J, Marcus T, Markant J Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):5075.

PMID: 36977822 PMC: 10047463. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-32069-7.


Respiratory Responses to Two Voice Interventions for Parkinson's Disease.

Richardson K, Huber J, Kiefer B, Kane C, Snyder S J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2022; 65(10):3730-3748.

PMID: 36167066 PMC: 9937051. DOI: 10.1044/2022_JSLHR-22-00262.


Investigating Cognitive Load in Energy Network Control Rooms: Recommendations for Future Designs.

Afzal U, Prouzeau A, Lawrence L, Dwyer T, Bichinepally S, Liebman A Front Psychol. 2022; 13:812677.

PMID: 35418923 PMC: 8995508. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.812677.


The effect of expertise, target usefulness and image structure on visual search.

Robson S, Tangen J, Searston R Cogn Res Princ Implic. 2021; 6(1):16.

PMID: 33709197 PMC: 7977019. DOI: 10.1186/s41235-021-00282-5.


References
1.
Evans J . Dual-processing accounts of reasoning, judgment, and social cognition. Annu Rev Psychol. 2007; 59:255-78. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093629. View

2.
Schyns P . Diagnostic recognition: task constraints, object information, and their interactions. Cognition. 1998; 67(1-2):147-79. DOI: 10.1016/s0010-0277(98)00016-x. View

3.
Wiggins M, Brouwers S, Davies J, Loveday T . Trait-based cue Utilization and initial skill acquisition: implications for models of the progression to expertise. Front Psychol. 2014; 5:541. PMC: 4042495. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00541. View

4.
Caffarra P, Vezzadini G, Zonato F, Copelli S, Venneri A . A normative study of a shorter version of Raven's progressive matrices 1938. Neurol Sci. 2004; 24(5):336-9. DOI: 10.1007/s10072-003-0185-0. View

5.
Loft S, Sanderson P, Neal A, Mooij M . Modeling and predicting mental workload in en route air traffic control: critical review and broader implications. Hum Factors. 2007; 49(3):376-99. DOI: 10.1518/001872007X197017. View