Abstract
It is argued that despite the large volume of vigilance research, only limited progress has been made in formulating principles and testing countermeasures aimed at minimizing the vigilance problem. In part this is because of the way we design our experiments, including the use of esoteric tasks, limited watch durations, and sterile experimental environments. More rapid progress toward knowledge that can be applied to real-world tasks requiring vigilance will be made if we pay greater heed to the critical features of operational tasks in designing our laboratory experiments. Examples are provided of how specificity of human responses to stimulus, temporal, and environmental variables in vigilance experiments could have led investigators to totally erroneous conclusions about the presence of the vigilance decrement and the effectiveness of potential countermeasures. The argument that basic research leads to generalizations of greater scientific power than research studies modeled after real-world conditions is challenged.

This publication has 11 references indexed in Scilit: