Modeling Task Prioritization Behaviors in a Time-Pressured Multitasking Environment
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
AN ABSTRACT OF THE DISSERTATION OF Takeaki Toma for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Industrial Engineering Presented on June 9, 2015 Title: Modeling Task Prioritization Behaviors in a Time-Pressured Multitasking Environment Abstract approved success Kenneth H. Funk II Funk’s (1991) cockpit task management (CTM) theory is structurally consistent with cognitive multitasking models: it addresses managing multiple and concurrent tasks in three stages: situation awareness, response selection, and response execution. Based on CTM theory, Colvin, Funk and Braune (2005) hypothesized that the following six factors may affect task prioritization: 1. expectations, 2. importance, 3. salience, 4. status (performance status), 5. required Time/Effort, and 6. urgency. Based on the above two research studies, the following three research questions were investigated: RQ-1) Can perceived task priority be explained by the following five factors? perceived task importance, urgency, performance status, salience, and workload RQ-2) Is there any relationship between the perceived task priority and the chance of noticing task-related cockpit instrument malfunction signals? If so, how much does the perceived task priority affect the chance of noticing task-related signals considering the following factors: salience of task-related signals, expectancy of task-related signals, and the number of concurrent tasks? and RQ-3) Can actual task execution and task performance be explained by the perceived task priority? A medium fidelity flight simulation study was conducted to test the above research questions. For RQ-1, the perceived task importance, perceived task urgency, and the perceived salience of the tasks were significantly related to the perceived task priority. For RQ-2 and RQ-3, the pilots were more likely to execute the tasks and notice malfunction signals within a shorter time when the task was highly prioritized. Findings from this study are consistent with other multitasking studies: concurrent multitasking eliminates the benefits that result from alternating and integrating stimulus-driven bottom-up and goal-driven top-down processing, which is regarded as critical in task prioritization. ©Copyright by Takeaki Toma June 9, 2015 All Rights Reserved Modeling Task Prioritization Behaviors in a Time-Pressured Multitasking Environment by Takeaki Toma A DISSERTATION Submitted to Oregon State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Presented June 9, 2015 Commencement June 2016 Doctor of Philosophy dissertation of Takeaki Toma presented on June 9, 2015 APPROVED: Major Professor, representing Industrial Engineering Head of the School of Mechanical, Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering Dean of the Graduate School I understand that my dissertation will become part of the permanent collection of Oregon State university libraries. My signature below authorizes release of my dissertation to any reader upon request. Takeaki Toma, Author ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I am very grateful for the warm encouragement and assistance from my graduate committee members. I am thankful for the continued support and understanding of my advisor and mentor Dr. Kenneth Funk who provided me with such a wonderful research topic. I also appreciate Dr. Funk for providing me with teaching / research assistantships that were both rewarding and interesting experiences. I especially would like to thank Dr. Sara Emerson for her help and support through the design of experiments and data analysis process, including validating assumptions, limitations, interpretation of statistical data analysis, such as regression analysis, mixed models, and survival data analysis. I greatly appreciate Dr. Mei Lien’s advice on cognitive psychology, literature review, definition of tasks, and how to write the methodology section based on other methodologies in the literature. I appreciate Dr. Anthony Veltri who was always supportive and expected a good study result. I appreciate Dr. Chinweike Eseonu for his encouragement and help. In addition, I appreciate the warm help and encouragement from Dr.David Cann, MIME associate head, and Dr. Brenda.McComb, the graduate school dean. I appreciate my mother, Sachiko Toma, and my father, Isamu Toma, and my siblings Kiyoka Morita, Shoko Toma, and Koji Toma for all of their support. I also appreciate people who warmly encouragement me, particularly Yoko Miyagi, Phuong Nguyen, Rebecca Ott, Patricia Lacy, and Dr. Marcey Bamba. I also would like to thank pilots Mr. Saher Bishara, Mr. Forrest Anderson and Mr. Michael Laviolette for fruitful help and advice on the design of flight simulation experiments as well as cockpit task management. I am thankful to Dr. Christopher Wickens and Dr. Pamela Tsang for their advice. I am also thankful to the Okinawa International Exchange and Human Resource Development Organization, and the Japan Student Services Organization for their financial support. Finally, I'm thankful for writing help from OSU's Graduate Writing Center assistants, particularly Aimee Clark, John Osborne, Coral Rost, and Robert Asinjo. TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................... 3 COCKPIT TASK MANAGEMENT (CTM) THEORY .............................................. 3 COGNITIVE VIEW OF HUMAN TASK PRIORITIZATION BEHAIVOR ............. 7 Task Prioritization Factors in the Situation Awareness Stage...................................7 Task Prioritization Factors in the Response Selection Stage ..................................11 Task Prioritization Factors in the Response Execution Stage .................................18 Workload and Strategic Control for Task Prioritization .........................................25 Summary of Task Prioritization Factors at the Cognitive Level .............................28 CRITICAL TASK PRIORITIZATION FACTORS IN THE AVIATION DOMAIN30 LITERATURE SUMMARY AND RESEARCH OPPORTUNITY .......................... 40 RESEARCH QUESTIONS ........................................................................................ 41 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................. 44 PARTICIPANTS ........................................................................................................ 44 EQUIPMENT ............................................................................................................. 45 PROTOCOL ............................................................................................................... 46 FLIGHT SCENARIO ................................................................................................. 47 MEASUREMENT AND HYPOTHESIS-TESTING ................................................. 49 Definition of Terms .................................................................................................49 Methodology for RQ-1 ............................................................................................52 Methodology for RQ-2 ............................................................................................55 Methodology for RQ-3 ............................................................................................65 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ................................................................................................ 67 RESULTS FOR RQ -1 ............................................................................................... 68 Relationship Between Perceived task importance and Perceived task priority .......69 Relationship Between Perceived task urgency and Perceived task priority ............71 Relationship Between Perceived Task performance Status and Perceived task Priority .....................................................................................................................73 Relationship Between Perceived task salience and Perceived task priority ............75 Relationship Between Perceived workload and Perceived task priority .................77 Characteristics of Perceived task urgency ...............................................................79 Individual Difference and Situation Difference ......................................................87 Relative Importance of Five Candidate Factors ......................................................93 Significant task prioritization criteria when considering five factors together .......96 Summary of the Result of RQ -1 .............................................................................99 RESULTS OF RQ -2 ................................................................................................ 101 Task Priority Effect on Awareness of Task-Related Signals ................................102 Signal Expectancy Effect on Awareness of Task-Related Signals .......................104 Signal Salience Effect on Awareness of Task-Related Signals.............................105 Number of Concurrent Task Effect on Awareness of Task-Related Signals ........106 Interaction of number of tasks against the Salience and Expectancy Factors .......107 Predicting the Awareness of Task-Related Signals with Priority, Expectancy, Salience and the Number of Concurrent Tasks .....................................................109 Summary of the Result of RQ-2 ............................................................................114