人格特征和任务难度对视觉搜索绩效的影响

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

视觉搜索作业在生产、生活中十分常见，学界对视觉搜索绩效的影响因素作了大量研究，但是目前尚缺少关于人格特征对视觉搜索绩效影响的研究。本研究分析了MBTI（MyersBriggs type indicator）人格与任务难度（高难度、低难度）对视觉搜索绩效的影响。结果表明内倾型人格在低难度任务下的正确率显著高于外倾型人格，在两种任务难度下知觉型人格的搜索时间均显著低于判断型人格，人格特征与任务难度对搜索正确率的影响的交互效应显著。本研究结果对视觉搜索任务的作业人员选择与培训具有指导意义。

关键词: MBTI人格, 视觉搜索, 绩效, 任务难度

Abstract:

Visual search is very common in both everyday life and industrial application. Numerous studies have been done to investigate the influencing factors of visual search performance. However, few studies have explored the effect of personality on visual search performance. MBTI (MyersBriggs type indicator) is used to examine personality and task difficulty (high vs. low) on visual search performance. Results indicate that introverts have better accuracy in low difficulty condition than extroverts. Participants with perceiving preference have shorter reaction time than those with judging preference regardless of task difficulty. The interactive effect of personality and task difficulty on search performance is significant. Guidelines are provided to visual search operators selection and training.

Key words: MBTI (MyersBriggs type indicator), visual search, performance, task difficulty

杨林栋，于瑞峰. 人格特征和任务难度对视觉搜索绩效的影响[J]. 工业工程.

YANG Lindong, YU Ruifeng. A Study of Personality and Effect of Task Difficulty on Visual Search Performance[J]. Industrial Engineering Journal .

参考文献

［1］DRURY C G, CLEMENT M R. The effect of area, density, and number of background characters on visual search［J］. Human Factors, 1978, 20(5): 597-602.
［2］YU R F, YANG L D. Age-related changes in visual lobe shape characteristics and their relationship to visual search performance［J］. Ergonomics, 2014, 57(9): 1300-1314.
［3］LIN C C. Effects of screen luminance combination and text color on visual performance with TFT-LCD［J］. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 2005, 35(3): 229-235.
［4］CHAN A H S, TANG N Y W. Visual lobe shape and search performance for targets of different difficulty［J］. Ergonomics, 2007, 50(2): 289-318.
［5］BOUCHARD T J. Genes, environment, and personality［J］. Science, 1994, 264(5166): 1700-1701.
［6］SALGADO J F, TA′URIZ G. The fivefactor model, forcedchoice personality inventories and performance: a comprehensive metaanalysis of academic and occupational validity studies［J］. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 2014, 23(1): 3-30.
［7］WU D W L, BISCHOF W F, ANDERSON N C, et al. The influence of personality on social attention［J］. Personality and Individual Differences, 2014(60): 25-29.
［8］PERLMAN S B, MORRIS J P, VANDER Wyk B C, et al. Individual differences in personality predict how people look at faces［J］. PloS One, 2009, 4(6): 5952-5957.
［9］GRAHAM E K, LACHMAN M E. Personality traits, facets and cognitive performance:age differences in their relations［J］. Personality and Individual Differences, 2014(59): 89-95.
［10］SZYMURA B, NECKA E. Visual selective attention and personality: an experimental verification of three models of extraversion［J］. Personality and Individual Differences, 1998, 24(5): 713-729.
［11］PLAISTED K, O-RIORDAN M, BARON-COHEN S. Enhanced visual search for a conjunctive target in autism［J］. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 1998, 39(5): 777-783.
［12］BROCK J, XU J Y, BROOKS K R. Individual differences in visual search: relationship to autistic traits, discrimination thresholds, and speed of processing［J］. Perception, 2011, 40(6): 739-742.
［13］FURNHAM A. The big five versus the big four: the relationship between the Myers Briggs type indicator (MBTI) and NEO-PI five factor model of personality［J］. Personality and Individual Differences. 1996, 21(2): 303-307.
［14］顾雪英, 胡湜. MBTI人格类型量表：新近发展及应用［J］. 心理科学进展, 2002, 20(10): 1700-1708.
GU X Y, HU S. MBTI: New development and application［J］. Advances in Psychological Science, 2002, 20(10): 1700-1708.
［15］MCCRAE R R, COSTA P T. Reinterpreting the Myers-Briggs type indicator from the perspective of the five-factor model of personality［J］. Journal of Personality, 1989, 57(1): 17-40.
［16］DAVITO A. A review of the Myers-Brigs type indicator∥Ninth mental measurement yearbook［M］. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press,1985.
［17］罗正学, 苗丹民, 皇甫恩, 等. MBTI-G人格类型量表中文版的修订［J］. 心理科学, 2001, 24(3): 361-362.
LUO Z X, MIAO D M, HUANGFU E, et al. Revision of Chinese version MBTI-G［J］. Psychological Science, 2001, 24(3): 361-362.
［18］苗丹民, 皇甫恩, ROSINA C C, 等. MBTI人格类型量表的效度分析［J］. 心理学报, 2000(3): 324-331.
MIAO D M, HUANGFU E, ROSINA C C, et al. Validity analysis of Chinese version MBTI［J］. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 2000(3): 324-331.
［19］COHEN A, IVRY R B. Density effects in conjunction search: evidence for a coarse location mechanism of feature integration［J］. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1991, 17(4): 891-901.

[1]	曲立, 王璐, 吴竹南, 齐二石. 现场管理工具运用对现场管理绩效提升的影响[J]. 工业工程, 2021, 24(5): 117-123.
[2]	徐新然, 郭肖亚, 于瑞峰. Gap效应对搜索目标显著性和绩效的影响[J]. 工业工程, 2021, 24(1): 117-122.
[3]	刘娇, 杨敬江. 基于知识协同的联盟企业创新绩效系统动力学模型构建与分析[J]. 工业工程, 2020, 23(5): 132-139.
[4]	程欢, 吴夷敏, 张光磊. 结构性创新对组织绩效的影响机制研究[J]. 工业工程, 2019, 22(4): 71-78.
[5]	李奇, 苗瑞, 张洁, 江志斌, 付圆. 面向电动汽车租赁的多目标服务组合优化设计[J]. 工业工程, 2019, 22(4): 101-108.
[6]	张玉磊, 朱怀念, 陈茜, 张光宇. 专业镇中小微企业技术创新服务平台绩效评价与实证研究——以广东省为例[J]. 工业工程, 2019, 22(4): 123-131.
[7]	赵正佳, 余曦. 高端装备制造企业效率及其与绩效关系的研究[J]. 工业工程, 2019, 22(3): 30-36.
[8]	邬益男, 战洪飞, 余军合. 基于需求层次分析的知识情境模型构建及实证研究[J]. 工业工程, 2019, 22(2): 73-81.
[9]	苏海涛, 方涛, 胡金枝. 基于学习曲线方法的残疾人生产线工作绩效提升研究[J]. 工业工程, 2017, 20(3): 23-27.
[10]	刘娜, 张运红, 于瑞峰, 张高艳. 动态视觉搜索任务中显示移动速度对视觉疲劳的影响[J]. 工业工程, 2017, 20(2): 51-55.
[11]	杨林栋1，宋馥璇1，张运红2，于瑞峰1. 目标出现概率、目标有无和时间压力对视觉搜索绩效的影响[J]. 工业工程, 2016, 19(6): 83-88.
[12]	卢荣花1,2, 李南1. 环境绩效视角下的闭环供应链定价和协调[J]. 工业工程, 2015, 18(5): 34-39.
[13]	卢纪华，唐志昆，赵希男. 相互依赖、沟通与供应链联盟绩效的关系研究[J]. 工业工程, 2015, 18(5): 56-63.
[14]	史德强，陆刚，王磊. 煤矿井下作业人因可靠性[J]. 工业工程, 2015, 18(5): 155-159.
[15]	谢卫红1，李忠顺1，屈喜凤1，王永健2. 实物期权理论的IT能力与企业绩效关系：时间节奏的中介作用[J]. 工业工程, 2015, 18(4): 22-30.