A comparison of methods used for inducing mental fatigue in performance research: individualised, dual-task and short duration cognitive tests are most effective

Kate O’Keeffe,Simon Hodder,Alex Lloyd

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2019.1687940

IF: 2.5612

2019-11-18

Ergonomics

Abstract:Despite research indicating the negative impact that mental fatigue has on physical and cognitive performance, whether this is a result of mental fatigue or a state of under-arousal remains unclear. The current research aimed to explore the effectiveness of the methods being used to induce mental fatigue. Twelve participants attended six sessions in which two cognitive tests, the AX-continuous performance test (AX-CPT) and the TloadDback test, were compared for their effectiveness in inducing mental fatigue. Both tests were set at a standard processing speed (1.2 ms) for two conditions, and a further condition involved the individualisation of the TloadDback test. Participants presented significantly higher physiological and psychological arousal (<i>p</i> &lt; 0.05) in the individualised dual-task test compared to the AX-CPT. The individualised TloadDback test is a more effective method of inducing mental fatigue compared to the AX-CPT, as it sustains physiological arousal whilst inducing measurable reductions in mental resources. <b>Practitioner summary:</b> Mental fatigue negatively impacts physical and cognitive performance. It is unclear whether the current methods being used to induce mental fatigue are effective. This study compared different methods and confirmed that short, individualised and dual-task tests are most effective for inducing mental fatigue whilst maintaining arousal.

engineering, industrial,ergonomics,psychology, applied