Malleable Attentional Resources Theory: A New Explanation for the Effects of Mental Underload on Performance

By Mark S. Young, Neville A Stanton. Hum. Factors, 2002

416 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/89e72611add2c1e825b6cd4bf683c87bec312ff9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

State of science: mental workload in ergonomics (2015, background): “Conversely, too little stimulation can lead to underload, as resources are either allocated elsewhere or otherwise shrink through underuse (cf. Young and Stanton 2002).”
Conflicts of interest: The implications of roadside advertising for driver attention (2009, background): “As Young and Stanton (2002) argued, lateral stability can be misrepresentative of proper driving technique on curved road sections (e.”
Highly Automated Driving, Secondary Task Performance, and Driver State (2012, background): “…when the relatively manageable workload required for automated driving and the TQT was suddenly and unexpectedly elevated during negotiation of the CI, prohibiting drivers from responding appropriately and in time, when required to regain control of the driving task (Young & Stanton, 2002).”
Human factors of transitions in automated driving: A general framework and literature survey (2016, background): “…1975; Endsley & Kiris, 1995; Hancock et al., 2013; Kaber & Endsley, 1997; Parasuraman & Riley, 1997; Vlakveld, 2015), which are issues that have also been implicated in the domain of automated driving (De Winter, Happee, Martens, & Stanton, 2014; Seppelt & Victor, 2016; Young & Stanton, 2002).”
Takeover Time in Highly Automated Vehicles: Noncritical Transitions to and From Manual Control (2017, background): “Vol. 59, No. 4, June 2017, pp. 689 –705 DOI: 10.1177/0018720816685832 Copyright © 2017, Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. et al., 1997; Stanton & Young, 2005; Young & Stanton, 2002) and that reaction times increase as the level of automation increases (Young & Stanton, 2007).”
Interaction in 4-second bursts: the fragmented nature of attentional resources in mobile HCI (2005, result): “Recent findings have also challenged some of the assumptions of Wickens, in particular the fixed capacity assumption [39].”
Instructional Efficiency: Revisiting the Original Construct in Educational Research (2008, background): “This is not the case—rather, the aim is to avoid both overload and underload, because learning deteriorates under these conditions (Teigen, 1994; Young & Stanton, 2002), as well as to reduce the load imposed by processes that do not contribute to or hamper learning (i.e., extraneous load) and…”
Attention and automation: New perspectives on mental underload and performance (2002, methodology): “Given the initial support for MART under normal operations (Young and Stanton 2002), the logical next step would be to perform a structured investigation of performance when reclaiming control from automation in a failure scenario.”
Vigilance Decrement and Passive Fatigue Caused by Monotony in Automated Driving (2015, background): “Various studies support this notion: Reduced attentional capacity [8], driving performance [9] and longer reaction times [10] are empirically shownconsequences.”
Three Decades of Driver Assistance Systems: Review and Future Perspectives (2014, background): “Mental underload from monotony, with the potential to induce inattention (e.g. Young & Stanton 2002), is an entirely unresolved issue.”