Objective: We aimed to provide an assessment of the impact of workload manipulations on various cardiac measurements. We further sought to determine the most effective measurement approaches of cognitive workload as well as quantify the conditions under which these measures are most effective for interpretation.
Background: Cognitive workload affects human performance, particularly when load is relatively high (overload) or low (underload). Despite ongoing interest in assessing cognitive workload through cardiac measures, it is currently unclear which cardiac-based assessments best indicate cognitive workload. Although several quantitative studies and qualitative reviews have sought to provide guidance, no meta-analytic integration of cardiac assessment(s) of cognitive workload exists to date.
Method: We used Morris and DeShon's meta-analytic procedures to quantify the changes in cardiac measures due to task load conditions.
Results: Sample-weighted Cohen's d values suggest that several metrics of cardiac activity demonstrate sensitivity in response to cognitive workload manipulations. Heart rate variability measures show sensitivity to task load, conditions of event rate, and task duration. Authors of future work should seek to quantify the utility of leveraging multiple metrics to understand workload.
Conclusion: Results suggest that assessment of cognitive workload can be done using various cardiac activity indicators. Further, given the number of valid and reliable measures available, researchers and practitioners should base their selection of a psychophysiological measure on the experimental and practical concerns inherent to their task/protocol.
Applications: Findings bear implications for future assessment of cognitive workload within basic and applied settings. Future research should seek to validate conditions under which measurements are best interpreted, including but not limited to individual differences.
Keywords: cardiac activity; cognition; mental workload; meta-analysis.