基于事件相关电位的认知负荷对任务时间效应的影响规律研究

doi:10.3969/j.issn.0258-8021.2024.02.002

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (15)

Download: PDF (8977 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract The aim of this work is to study the influence of time-on-task effects on event related potential characteristics under different cognitive loads and explore the impact of mental workload on time-on-task effects. A cognitive function experimental paradigm based on the N-back task was designed.Twenty healthy subjects were recruited to participate in the experiment adopting this paradigm. Throughout the experiment, the subjective scale results and EEG signals of the subjects were collected for behavioral statistical analysis and event related potential analysis. With the enhancement of time on task, the reaction time (RT) of the subjects was significantly decreased when accomplishing the 3-back task, coefficient of variation of reaction time was increased both in 0-back task and 3-back task. During the N-back experiment, N1 amplitude increased significantly in occipital regions, while P300 amplitude in the prefrontal and central frontal regions decreased significantly. In both the 0-back and 3-back tasks, changes in P2 amplitude in subjects′ prefrontal regions were linearly correlated with reaction time (r=-0.44, P<0.05;r=-0.59, P<0.05), while P2 amplitude was negatively correlated with the coefficient of variation of reaction time (r=-0.39, P<0.05;r=-0.42, P<0.05). In the 3-back task, the mean P300 amplitude in frontal, central and parietal regions was significantly correlated with reaction time (r=-0.49, P<0.05), whereas the P300 amplitude in the 0-back task was significantly negatively correlated with reaction time and the coefficient of variation of reaction time (r=-0.69, P<0.05;r=-0.51, P<0.05). These results suggested that P2 and P300 in prefrontal and midfrontal regions were influenced by time-on-task effect, while the P300 of occipital region was more likely to be affected by cognitive load and time-on-task effect.

Key words： time-on-task effect electroencephalography (EEG) event related potential cognitive load

Received: 29 June 2023

PACS:

R318

Corresponding Authors: ^* E-mail:clarenceke@tju.edu.cn

About author:: ^#Senior member, Chinese Society of Biomedical Engineering

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	Ma Ke
	Ke Yufeng
	Wang Tao
	Ming Dong

Cite this article:

Ma Ke,Ke Yufeng,Wang Tao, et al. ERP-based Study on the Influence of Cognitive Load on Time-on-task Effect[J]. Chinese Journal of Biomedical Engineering, 2024, 43(2): 143-152.

URL:

http://cjbme.csbme.org/EN/10.3969/j.issn.0258-8021.2024.02.002 OR http://cjbme.csbme.org/EN/Y2024/V43/I2/143

[1] Mackworth NH. The breakdown of vigilance during prolonged visual search [J]. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2018, 1(1): 6-21.
[2] Loeb M, Davies DR, Parasuraman R. The psychology of vigilance [J]. The American Journal of Psychology, 1982, 97(3): 466-466.
[3] Boksem MA, Meijman TF, Lorist MM. Effects of mental fatigue on attention: an ERP study [J]. Brain Res Cogn Brain Res, 2005, 25(1): 107-116.
[4] Lim J, Wu Wenchau, Wang Jiongjiong, et al. Imaging brain fatigue from sustained mental workload: an ASL perfusion study of the time-on-task effect [J]. Neuroimage, 2010, 49(4): 3426-3435.
[5] Kamzanova AT, Matthews G, Kustubayeva AM, et al. EEG indices to time-on-task effects and to a workload manipulation (cueing) [J]. World Academy of ence Engineering & Technology, 2011, 5(8): 928-931.
[6] Babu HSI, Wang Chao, Burke SE, et al. Compensatory neural responses to cognitive fatigue in young and older adults [J]. Front Neural Circuits, 2019, 13: 12.
[7] Qi Peng, Hu Hongying, Zhu Li, et al. EEG functional connectivity predicts individual behavioural impairment during mental fatigue [J]. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng, 2020, 28(9): 2080-2089.
[8] Robertson IH, Manly T, Andrade J, et al. 'Oops!': performance correlates of everyday attentional failures in traumatic brain injured and normal subjects [J]. Neuropsychologia, 1997, 35(6): 747-758.
[9] Manly T, Robertson IH, Galloway M, et al. The absent mind: further investigations of sustained attention to response [J]. Neuropsychologia, 1999, 37(6): 661-670.
[10] Sanders AF. A summary of resource theories from a behavioral perspective [J]. Biol Psychol, 1997, 45(1-3): 5-18.
[11] Warm JS, Parasuraman R, Matthews G. Vigilance requires hard mental work and is stressful [J]. Hum Factors, 2008, 50(3): 433-441.
[12] Krimsky M, Forster DE, Llabre MM, et al. The influence of time on task on mind wandering and visual working memory [J]. Cognition, 2017, 169: 84-90.
[13] Pesonen M, Hamalainen H, Krause CM. Brain oscillatory 4-30 Hz responses during a visual n-back memory task with varying memory load [J]. Brain Res, 2007, 1138: 171-177.
[14] 杨硕, 彭森, 王磊. 精神疲劳对工作记忆α振荡信息整合的影响 [J]. 中国生物医学工程学报, 2021, 40(4): 461-468.
[15] Shacham S. A shortened version of the Profile of Mood States [J]. J Pers Assess, 1983, 47(3): 305-306.
[16] DeLoach LJ, Higgins MS, Caplan AB, et al. The visual analog scale in the immediate postoperative period: intrasubject variability and correlation with a numeric scale [J]. Anesth Analg, 1998, 86(1): 102-106.
[17] Geiger BJ, Wieroney M, Blair L, et al. Measuring subjective sleepiness at work in hospital nurses: validation of a modified delivery format of the Karolinska Sleepiness Scale [J]. Sleep Breath, 2014, 18(4): 731-739.
[18] Hart SG. NASA-Task Load Index (NASA-TLX); 20 years later [J]. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 2006, 50(9): 904-908.
[19] Delorme A, Makeig S. EEGLAB: an open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis [J]. J Neurosci Methods, 2004, 134(1): 9-21.
[20] Haatveit BC, Sundet K, Hugdahl K, et al. The validity of d prime as a working memory index: results from the "Bergen n-back task" [J]. J Clin Exp Neuropsychol, 2010, 32(8): 871-880.
[21] Tamm L, Narad ME, Antonini TN, et al. Reaction time variability in ADHD: a review [J]. Neurotherapeutics, 2012, 9(3): 500-508.
[22] Wang Chao, Ding Mingzhou, Kluger BM. Change in intraindividual variability over time as a key metric for defining performance-based cognitive fatigability [J]. Brain Cogn, 2014, 85: 251-258.
[23] Hemmelmann C, Horn M, Susse T, et al. New concepts of multiple tests and their use for evaluating high-dimensional EEG data [J]. J Neurosci Methods, 2005, 142(2): 209-217.
[24] Kathner I, Wriessnegger SC, Muller-Putz GR, et al. Effects of mental workload and fatigue on the P300, alpha and theta band power during operation of an ERP (P300) brain-computer interface [J]. Biol Psychol, 2014, 102: 118-129.
[25] Mason MF, Norton MI, Van HJD, et al. Wandering minds: the default network and stimulus-independent thought [J]. Science, 2007, 315(5810): 393-395.
[26] Lin Li, Leung AWS, Wu Jianhui, et al. Individual differences under acute stress: Higher cortisol responders performs better on N-back task in young men [J]. Int J Psychophysiol, 2020, 150: 20-28.
[27] Luck SJ, Heinze HJ, Mangun GR, et al. Visual event-related potentials index focused attention within bilateral stimulus arrays. II. Functional dissociation of P1 and N1 components [J]. Electroencephalogr Clin Neurophysiol, 1990, 75(6): 528-542.
[28] Scharinger C, Soutschek A, Schubert T, et al. Comparison of the working memory load in n-back and working memory span tasks by means of EEG frequency band power and P300 amplitude [J]. Front Hum Neurosci, 2017, 11: 6.
[29] Wang Chao, Trongnetrpunya A, Samuel IB, et al. Compensatory neural activity in response to cognitive fatigue [J]. J Neurosci, 2016, 36(14): 3919-3924.
[30] Xiao Yi, Wu Jintao, Li Jiaxuan, et al. The neuro patterns prior to error responses in long-lasting working memory task: an event-related potential study [J]. Front Behav Neurosci, 2019, 13: 277.