History of the PVT
The PVT-B is simply a 3-minute version of the regular 10-minute PVT. |
Sleep researchers have known for decades that a loss of sleep reduces vigilance. What is now widely known as the Psychomotor Vigilance Test is based on the work by Wilkinson and Houghton (1982). These authors had developed a test called the Unprepared Simple Reaction Time Test (USRT) which was run on something looking like a portable casette recorder. David Dinges elaborated this task and called it first simply Visual Reaction Time in a much cited paper (Dinges & Powell, 1985). It seems the term "PVT" was first used around 1990 (Graeber et al., 1990).
A good review paper of this task and its role in attention is the Lim and Dinges (2008) study. This study also discusses the effect of various drugs on the PVT and sleep. |
There is good scientific evidence that sleep deprivation affects sustained attention (Wüst, 2011), something you need in many activities, including sitting down for an exam or driving a car. |
Task description
In this task, the participant sees a red box. Every so often, a yellow running number is presented within this box. The participant needs to respond as quickly as possible to the running number. When responded, the running number disappears and participant waits for next number.
In the regular version, this task lasts exactly 10 minutes, but there are shorter versions, including the PVT-B (B for "brief"), which is a 3 minute version of this which has even been tested in by astronauts in the International Space Station (Tu et al., 2022).
There are different ways to extract scores from the data from a participant. The PVT scores include 3 measures:
-
Average response time
-
Number of failures to respond within the time limit of half a second (lapses, omissions)
-
Number of responses when there is no yellow number (commissions)
Sleep deprivation can be measured in three ways in the PVT:
-
Slower responses (i.e., longer avera response time)
-
Increased number of omissions (lapses), that is, where people fail to respond within half a second.
-
Increased number of commissions (responding when there is no number)
Advantages of the PVT-B (compared to standard PVT) are that it is considerably shorted and thus easier to integrate in a larger study. According to the authors, "PVT-B may be a useful tool for assessing behavioral alertness in settings where the duration of the 10-min PVT is considered impractical, although further validation in applied settings is needed." (Bassner, Mollicone, & Dinges, 2011).
You can calculate an overall performance score, as was for example done by Tu and colleagues (2022):
Overall Performance Score = 1 - ( Number of False starts + Number of lapses ) / ( All trials )
This score, however, ignores the response speed.
In this task, researchers like to express response times as reciprocal RTs in seconds. For example, a regular response time of 500 ms would then be: 1/1000 = 2 (seconds) reciprocal RT. Higher values indicate shorter RTs. Arguably, can be confusing, but there are good reasons for it. The 1/RT normalizes the normally skewed distribution of RTs. |
Timing of trials
Timing is a key issue in this task and varies between different PVT versions. In this 3-minutes PVT-B version, the timing of one trials is as follows. You can of course change these variables as you please.
-
An empty red box is shown and continuously visible across 3 minutes
-
Do nothing for a random delay between 0 and 3 seconds (i.e., 3000 milliseconds)
-
A counter starts running and is updated every 50 ms
-
We give people up to 30 seconds ms to respond, even though responses slower than 500 ms are considered lapses
-
Give feedback for 1 second: This is simply the number in the now stopped counter
In the PVT-B, random intervals are thus only between 0 and 3000 ms, this is different from the standard PVT, where it is between 2 and 10 seconds. |
Participant instructions and feedback
In the normal PVT setup, participants are told to respond as quickly as possible. They do not get feedback when they respond to early or too late (i.e., after 500 ms).
Participants do not get feedback about their mistakes. If people try to be really fast, they will by definition make more early starts. They are not told they do this so there is no learning. Also, when people are too slow this no feedback is given.
The idea is that this allows researchers to measure the effects of sleep deprivation. One can question, however, if participants would not perform better with feedback. |
Inconsistencies
The PVT-B article (Basner et al, 2011) is sometimes somewhat ambiguous, but this seems due to wrong use of the term Inter Stimulus Interval (ISI).
On the one hand the paper states: "The inter-stimulus intervals varied randomly from 1 to 4 s (including a 1 s RT feedback interval)."
On the other hand, it says (but not necessarily explicitly states) that the response window is up to 30 seconds:
"Both versions gave a signal after a 30 s period without response, which was counted as a lapse (see below) with 30 s response time."
The latter means that the inter-stimulus interval cannot possible be 1 to 4 seconds, it means that the response-stimulus interval is 1 to 4 seconds.
It seems that they actually mean Inter Response Interval instead of Inter Stimulus Interval.
Scores of people
So how to people perform on this task? The original Basner (2011) paper focuses mostly on validating the task in relation to the longer PVT task and the best estimate of RTs are in the figures, especially Figure 1. Of course, you could use the PVT 10 (10 minutes) for which there are more published data.
A good paper to get average data in the regular 10 minute PVT are in the paper by Thomann and colleagues (2014). Their Table 2 shows among other things the following for 67 healthy control participants. We added the corresponding regular RTs.
PVT measure |
score ± standard deviation |
corresponding RT where applicable |
1/RT |
4.51±0.42 |
222 ms |
1/RT500 |
4.52±0.42 |
221 ms |
1/RT variability |
1.60±0.30 |
625 ms |
Fastest 10% |
5.46±0.45 |
183 ms |
Slowest 10% |
3.18±0.43 |
314 ms |
False RT |
1.99±2.88 |
|
Lapses |
0.39±0.69 |
Notes about the table (these are direct quotes from Table 2 of the Thoman paper:
-
1/RT refers to mean reciprocal reaction time (RT) in 1/seconds.
-
1/RT500, mean reciprocal reaction time without RT of lapses in 1/seconds.
-
1/RT variability, range between the 10th and the 90th percentile in 1/seconds.
-
Fastest 10%, mean of the reciprocal of the fastest 10% RTs in 1/seconds.
-
Slowest 10%, mean of the reciprocal of the slowest 10% RTs in 1/seconds.
-
Lapses, number of responses > 500 milliseconds (transformed by (SQR(x)+SQR(x+1)).
-
False RT, number of false responses divided by the number of valid stimuli in percentage.
The use of reciprocal RTs is common in the PVT literature. For example, a reciprocal RT of 4.51 is 1/4.41 seconds or 222 ms.
About this implementation
The task is relatively simple to implement, as it simply involves responding to a running timer in a box. People are only allowed to respond if a counter is shown. Response times shorter than 100 ms are also considered false starts, in line with the paper (Basner, 2011).
In the demo below, feedback is switch on. You can easily switch it off if you copy the code to your own account. In the options section, make sure to set &showDetailedFeedback to value 0 (in the code of the demo, it is at value 1) |
set &showDetailedFeedback 0
Run the demo of the three minute version
Data output file
In PsyToolkit, the data output file is simply a textfile. The save line of the PsyToolkit experiment script determines what is being saved in the data output file. Typically, for each experimental trial, you would have exactly one line in your text file, and each number/word on that line gives you the information you need for your data analysis, such as the condition, response speed, and whether an error was made. |
Meaning of the columns in the output datafile. You need this information for your data analysis.
Colum | Meaning |
---|---|
1 |
status (1=correct, 2=too early, 3=no response) |
2 |
random delay chosen (between 0 and 2500 ms) |
3 |
total time so far (up to 180,000, that is 3 seconds) |
4 |
RT as measured from start of trial |
5 |
RT as measured from onset of yellow counter |
6 |
average RT so far in block |
7 |
total number trials so far |
8 |
number of failures to respond (lapses/omissions) |
9 |
number of wrong response (starting before yellow counter, commissions) |
Check out the source code
Download
If you have a PsyToolkit account, you can upload the zipfile directly to your PsyToolkit account. |
If you want to upload the zipfile into your PsyToolkit account, make sure the file is not automatically uncompressed (some browsers, especially Mac Safari, by default uncompress zip files). Read here how to easily deal with this.
Further reading
-
Basner, M., Mollicone, D., Dinges, D.F. (2011). Validity and Sensitivity of a Brief Psychomotor Vigilance Test (PVT-B) to Total and Partial Sleep Deprivation. Acta Astronautica, 69, 949-959. DOI: 10.1016/j.actaastro.2011.07.015. PMID: 22025811; PMCID: PMC3197786. Freely accessible via PubMed Central
-
Dinges, D. F., & Powell, J. W. (1985). Microcomputer analyses of performance on a portable, simple visual RT task during sustained operations. Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers, 17(6), 652-655.
-
Graeber, R., Rosekind, M., Connell, L., & Dinges, D. (1990). Cockpit napping. ICAO Journal, 10, 6-11.
-
Lim, J., & Dinges, D. F. (2008). Sleep deprivation and vigilant attention. Annals of the new York Academy of Sciences, 1129(1), 305-322.
-
Thomann, J., Baumann, C. R., Landolt, H. P., & Werth, E. (2014). Psychomotor vigilance task demonstrates impaired vigilance in disorders with excessive daytime sleepiness. Journal of Clinical Sleep Medicine, 10(9), 1019-1024.
-
Tu, D., Basner, M., Smith, M. G., Williams, E. S., Ryder, V. E., Romoser, A. A., Ecker, A., Aeschbach, D., Stahn, A. C., Jones, C. W., Howard, K., Kaizi-Lutu, M., Dinges, D. F., & Shou, H. (2022). Dynamic ensemble prediction of cognitive performance in spaceflight. Scientific reports, 12(1), 11032. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-14456-8 Freely accessible via PubMed Central
-
Wilkinson, R. T., & Houghton, D. (1982). Field test of arousal: a portable reaction timer with data storage. Human factors, 24(4), 487–493. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872088202400409
-
Wüst, L. N., Capdevila, N. C., Lane, L. T., Reichert, C. F., & Lasauskaite, R. (2024). Impact of one night of sleep restriction on sleepiness and cognitive function: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Sleep Medicine Reviews, 76, 101940. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smrv.2024.101940 Read online for free