Chen JH, Huang TH, Yenn TC, et al. Predicting work performance in nuclear power plants. Safe Sci. 2008;46(7):1115-24.
Widyanti A, de Waard D, Johnson A, Mulder B. National culture moderates the influence of mental effort on subjective and cardiovascular measures. Ergonomics. 2013;56(2):182-94. DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2012.748219 PMID: 23234266Knaepen K, Marusic U, Crea S, Rodriguez Guerrero CD, Vitiello N, Pattyn N, et al. Psychophysiological response to cognitive workload during symmetrical, asymmetrical and dual-task walking. Hum Mov Sci. 2015;40:248-63. DOI: 10.1016/j.humov.2015.01.001 PMID: 25617994Mehta RK, Nussbaum MA, Agnew MJ. Muscle- and task-dependent responses to concurrent physical and mental workload during intermittent static work. Ergonomics. 2012;55(10):1166-79. DOI:
10.1080/00140139.2012.703695 PMID: 22849301Comparison of four subjective workload rating scales. Hum Factor J Hum Factor Ergonom Soci. 1992;34(4):429-39.
Miyake S, Yamada S, Shoji T, Takae Y, Kuge N, Yamamura T. Physiological responses to workload change. A test/retest
examination. Appl Ergon. 2009;40(6):987-96. DOI: 10.1016/j.apergo.2009.02.005 PMID: 19303586Zadry HR, Dawal SZ, Taha Z. The relation between upper limb muscle and brain activity in two precision levels of repetitive light tasks. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2011;17(4):373-84. DOI: 10.1080/10803548.2011.11076901 PMID: 22152503Mehta RK, Agnew MJ. Effects of physical and mental demands on shoulder muscle fatigue. Work. 2012;41 Suppl 1:2897-901. DOI: 10.3233/WOR-2012-0541-2897 PMID: 22317159Pérusse-Lachance E, Tremblay A, Chaput JP, Poirier P, Teasdale N, Drapeau V, et al. Mental work stimulates cardiovascular responses through a reduction in cardiac parasympathetic modulation in men and women. 2012:1-6.
Gazzaniga M, Ivry R, Mangun G. Learning and memory. Cognitive neuroscience: The biology of the mind. 2009:312-63.
Scott A, Khan KM, Duronio V, Hart DA. Mechanotransduction in human bone: in vitro cellular physiology that underpins bone changes
The Impact of Mental Workload Levels on Physiological and Subjective Responses
Majid Falahi 1, Majid Motamedzade 2, *, Zahra Sharifi 3, Rashid Heidari Moghaddam 4, Alireza Soltanian 5
Department of Occupational Hygiene, Faculty of Health, Sabzevar University of
Medical Sciences, Sabzevar, Iran
Professor, Department of Ergonomics, School of Health and Research Center for
Health Sciences, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran 3 MSc Department of Occupational Hygiene, Faculty of Health, Sabzevar University of Medical Sciences, Sabzevar, Iran
Associate Professor, Department of Ergonomics, Faculty of Health and Medical
در این سایت فقط تکه هایی از این مطلب با شماره بندی انتهای صفحه درج می شود که ممکن است هنگام انتقال از فایل ورد به داخل سایت کلمات به هم بریزد یا شکل ها درج نشود
شما می توانید تکه های دیگری از این مطلب را با جستجو در همین سایت بخوانید
ولی برای دانلود فایل اصلی با فرمت ورد حاوی تمامی قسمت ها با منابع کامل
Sciences Research Center, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medical
Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
Associate Professor, Department of Biostatistics & Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran
* Corresponding author: Majid Motamedzadeh, Professor, Department of Ergonomics,
School of Health and Research Center for Health Sciences, Hamadan University of Medical Sciences, Hamadan, Iran. E-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Introduction: Advances in technology and the use of complex systems at work have imposed high mental workloads to operators; so, continuous monitoring of mental workload can help to prevent mental problems and maintain mental health. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the impact of mental workload on physiological and subjective responses.
Methods: This cross-sectional descriptive-analytical study was performed on 16 healthy university students in 2014 at a laboratory setting. Physiological parameters of surface electromyography and electrocardiography in six blocks (resting, high mental work, moderate, low, very low and recovery) were measured using NeXus4-. After performing each block, the NASA-TLX questionnaire was completed. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS software version 21.0. A %5 significance level was adopted in all the tests.
Results: The results showed significant differences for the average score of NASA-TLX between the different levels of mental work load (P < 0.05). Also, the analysis of repeated measures variance showed significant differences for heart rate and heart rate variability parameters in the six blocks (P < 0.05), but no significant difference was observed for the shoulder muscles activity.
conclusions: Different levels of mental work load can impact on people’s subjective responses and some of their physiological responses. Thus, in such workplaces, it will be necessary to conduct an ergonomic program to manage mental health.