The sensitivity of mental workload measures is influenced by cultural and individual factors. One individual factor that is hypothesized to influence mental workload is time orientation. The aim of this study is to observe the influence of time orientation on temporal demand and subjective mental workload. One hundred and two participants representing three different time orientations, namely monochronic, neutral, and polychronic orientations, assessed using the Modified Polychronic Attitude Index 3 (MPAI3), voluntarily participated in this study. Participants were instructed to complete a search and count task in four different conditions with varying degrees of difficulty. Mental workload was assessed using subjective (NASA-TLX) and objective (heart rate variability, or HRV) methods and analyzed for each condition. The results show that, with comparable performance and comparable HRV, monochronic participants show higher sensitivity than neutral or polychronic participants in subjective mental workload, particularly the temporal demand dimension. The implications are discussed.
Purchase
Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):
Institutional Login
Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials
Personal login
Log in with your brill.com account
Gao F. & Gao Q. (2011). The effect of time orientation and representation of points of interest on the use of mobile tour guide. In Jacko J. A. (Ed.), Human–computer interaction. Towards mobile and intelligent interaction environments (pp. 59–68). Berlin, Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
Gopher D. & Donchin E. (1986). Workload: An examination of the concept. In Boff K. R. , Kaufman L. , & Thomas J. P. (Eds), Handbook of perception and human performance, Vol. 2, Cognitive processes and performance, pp. 41-1–41-49. New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
Grassmann M. , Vleminck E. , Leupoldt A. von , & Van den Bergh O. (2017). Individual differences in cardiorespiratory measures of mental workload: An investigation of negative affectivity and cognitive avoidant coping in pilot candidates. Appl. Ergon., 59, 274–282.
Guastello S. J. , Shircel A. , Malon M. , & Timm P. (2015). Individual differences in the experience of cognitive workload. Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci., 16, 20–52.
Hall, E. T & Hall E. T. (1990). The hidden dimension . New York, NY, USA: Anchor Books.
Hart S. G. & Staveland L. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In Hancock P. A. & Meshkati N. (Eds), Human mental workload (pp. 139–183). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.
Hertzum M. & Hulmegaard K. D. (2013). Perceived time as a measure of mental workload: Effects of time constraints and task success. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. , 29, 26–39.
Johnson A. & Widyanti A (2011). Cultural influences on the measurement of subjective mental workload. Ergonomics , 54, 509–518.
Kaufman-Scarborough C. & Lindquist J. D. (1999). Time management and polychronicity: Comparisons, contrasts, and insights for the workplace. J. Manag. Psychol. , 14, 288–312.
Lindquist J.D. , Knieling J. , & Kaufman-Scarborough C. (2001). Polychronicity and consumer behavior outcomes among Japanese and US students: A study of response to culture in a US university setting. Proceedings of the Tenth Biennial World Marketing Congress . Cardiff, UK.
Luximon Y. & Goonetilleke R. S. (2012). Time use behavior in single and time-sharing tasks. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. , 70, 332–345.
Mulder L. J. M. (1992). Measurement and analysis methods of heart rate and respiration for use in applied environments. Biol. Psychol. , 34, 205–236.
Mulder L. J. M. , Dijksterhuis C. , Stuiver A. & de Waard D. (2009). Cardiovascular state changes during performance of a simulated ambulance dispatcher’s task: Potential use for adaptive support. Appl. Ergon., 40, 965–977.
O’Donnell R. D. & Eggemeier F. T. (1986). Workload assessment methodology. In Boff K. R. , Kaufman L. , & Thomas J. P. (Eds), Handbook of perception and human performance, Vol. 2, Cognitive processes and performance (pp. 42-1–42-49). New York, NY, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
Roxburgh S. (2004). ‘There just aren’t enough hours in the day’: The mental health consequences of time pressure. J. Health Soc. Behav., 45, 115–131.
Rubio S. , Díaz E. , Martín J. , & Puente J. M. (2004). Evaluation of subjective mental workload: A comparison of SWAT, NASA-TLX, and workload profile methods. Appl. Psychol. , 53, 61–86.
Shakouri M. , Aghazadeh F. , & Ikuma L. H. (2016). Individual differences in drivers’ perceived workload near construction work zones. Occup. Ergon., 13, 101–117.
So W. K. Y. , Wong S. W. H. , Mak J. N. , & Chan R. H. M. (2017). An evaluation of mental workload with frontal EEG. PloS One, 12, e0174949. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174949.
Tsang P. S. & Vidulich M. A. (2006). Mental workload and situation awareness. In Salvendy G. (Ed.), Handbook of human factors and ergonomics (pp. 243–268). Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons.
Veltman J. A. & Gaillard A. W. K. (1996). Physiological indices of workload in a simulated flight task. Biol. Psychol. , 42, 323–342.
Widyanti A. , de Waard D. , Johnson A. , & Mulder B. (2013). National culture moderates the influence of mental effort on subjective and cardiovascular measures. Ergonomics , 56, 182–194.
Widyanti A. , Hanna, Muslim K. , & Sutalaksana I. Z. (2017). The sensitivity of Galvanic Skin Response for assessing mental workload in Indonesia. Work, 56, 111–117.
Zhang Y. , Goonetilleke R. S. , Plocher T. , & Liang S.-F. M. (2004). Time orientation and human performance. In Khalid H. M. , Helander M. G. , Yeo A. W. (Eds). Work with computing systems (pp. 248–252). Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Damai Sciences.
Zhang Y. , Goonetilleke R. S. , Plocher T. , & Liang S.-F. M. (2005). Time-related behaviour in multitasking situations. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. , 62, 425–455.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 2066 | 412 | 24 |
Full Text Views | 122 | 26 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 186 | 53 | 2 |
The sensitivity of mental workload measures is influenced by cultural and individual factors. One individual factor that is hypothesized to influence mental workload is time orientation. The aim of this study is to observe the influence of time orientation on temporal demand and subjective mental workload. One hundred and two participants representing three different time orientations, namely monochronic, neutral, and polychronic orientations, assessed using the Modified Polychronic Attitude Index 3 (MPAI3), voluntarily participated in this study. Participants were instructed to complete a search and count task in four different conditions with varying degrees of difficulty. Mental workload was assessed using subjective (NASA-TLX) and objective (heart rate variability, or HRV) methods and analyzed for each condition. The results show that, with comparable performance and comparable HRV, monochronic participants show higher sensitivity than neutral or polychronic participants in subjective mental workload, particularly the temporal demand dimension. The implications are discussed.
All Time | Past 365 days | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 2066 | 412 | 24 |
Full Text Views | 122 | 26 | 1 |
PDF Views & Downloads | 186 | 53 | 2 |