Page 86 - JSOM Spring 2026

over the PFC was lower during NVG use (25.7%–26.5%) 12. Domenech P, Koechlin E. Executive control and decision-making
during both marksmanship and cognitive tasks, suggesting in- in the prefrontal cortex. Curr Opin Behav Sci. 2015;1:101–106.
creased neurovascular coupling and metabolic demand. These doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2014.10.007
findings demonstrate that NVG use poses persistent challenges 13. Kennerley SW, Walton ME. Decision making and reward in fron-
to operational performance, underscoring the need for fur- tal cortex. Behav Neurosci. 2011;125(3):297–317. doi:10.1037/
a0023575
ther research to develop strategies that mitigate these deficits 14. Pinti P, Cardone D, Merla A. Simultaneous fNIRS and thermal in-
during critical low-light tasks. frared imaging during cognitive task reveal autonomic correlates
of prefrontal cortex activity. Sci Rep. 2015;5:17471. doi:10.1038/
Author Contributions srep17471
JT, CS, and JS conceived the study concept. JT, MS, OW, and 15. Pinti P, Tachtsidis I, Hamilton A, et al. The present and future
use of functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) for cogni-
CU coordinated and collected the data, and RR analyzed the tive neuroscience. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2020;1464(1):5–29. doi:10.
data. RR wrote the first draft, and all authors read and ap- 1111/nyas.13948
proved the final manuscript. 16. Butterworth RF. Brain energy metabolism. In: Siegel GJ, Agra-
noff BW, Albers RW, et al., eds. Basic Neurochemistry: Molecular,
Cellular and Medical Aspects. 6th ed. Lippincott-Raven; 1999.
Disclaimer Accessed April 8, 2025. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/
The authors declare no financial interests or conflicts of inter- NBK28124/
est in the matter discussed in this manuscript. 17. Suppan E, Pichler G, Binder-Heschl C, Schwaberger B, Urlesberger
B. Three physiological components that influence regional cere-
Disclosures bral tissue oxygen saturation. Front Pediatr. 2022;10:913223.
The authors have nothing to disclose. doi:10.3389/fped.2022.913223
18. Norrbrand L, Grönkvist M, Johannesson B, Rappe A, Sjölin J,
Eiken O. Increased metabolic demand during outside walking in
Funding darkness with no vision or with visual aid. Mil Med. 2023;188(9–
This study was supported by EOTECH LLC. The funder had 10):e3118–e3126. doi:10.1093/milmed/usad082
no role in study design, data collection, analysis, or prepara- 19. Norrbrand L, Grönkvist M, Kounalakis S, Halvorsen K, Eiken
tion of the manuscript. O. Metabolic demands and kinematics during level walking in
darkness with no vision or with visual aid. Mil Med. 2023;188(7–
8):e2010–e2017. doi:10.1093/milmed/usac327
References 20. Graci V, Elliott DB, Buckley JG. Peripheral visual cues affect min-
1. Pinkus A, Task HL. Measuring observers’ visual acuity through imum-foot-clearance during overground locomotion. Gait Pos-
night vision goggles. Defense Technical Information Center;1998. ture. 2009;30(3):370–374. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.2009.06.011
Accession No. ADA430646. Accessed December 18, 2025. https:// 21. Marigold DS, Patla AE. Visual information from the lower visual
apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/ADA430646.pdf field is important for walking across multi-surface terrain. Exp
2. Task HL, Donohue-Perry MM, Davis SA. Visual acuity versus Brain Res. 2008;188(1):23–31. doi:10.1007/s00221-008-1335-7
field-of-view and light level for night vision goggles (NVG). 22. Taneda K, Mani H, Kato N, et al. Effects of simulated peripheral
Defense Technical Information Center; 1994. Accession No. visual field loss on the static postural control in young healthy
ADA284750. Accessed May 6, 2025. https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/ adults. Gait Posture. 2021;86:233–239. doi:10.1016/j.gaitpost.
citations/ADA284750 2021.03.011
3. Wells KH, Wagner H, Reich LN, Hardigan PC. Military readi- 23. Toet A, Jansen SEM, Delleman NJ. Effects of field-of-view restric-
ness: an exploration of the relationship between marksmanship tions on speed and accuracy of manoeuvring. Percept Mot Skills.
and visual acuity. Mil Med. 2009;174(4):398–402. doi:10.7205/ 2007;105(3 Pt 2):1245–1256. doi:10.2466/pms.105.4.1245-1256
MILMED-D-00-6408 24. Weinand FS, Rommel S. Influence of phosphor screen color
4. Barrett JM, Healey LA, Fischer SL, Callaghan JP. Cervical spine on performance with modern night vision goggles. In: Electro-
motion requirements from night vision goggles may play a greater Optical and Infrared Systems: Technology and Applications XVI.
role in chronic neck pain than helmet mass properties. Hum Fac- Proc. SPIE. October 9, 2019;11159:72–77. Strasbourg, France.
tors. 2024;66(2):363–376. doi:10.1177/00187208221090689 doi:10.1117/12.2532485. Accessed: August 15, 2025. https://www.
5. Crowley JS. Human factors of night vision devices: anecdotes from spiedigitallibrary.org/conference-proceedings-of-spie/11159/
the field concerning visual illusions and other effects. National 111590C/Influence-of-phosphor-screen-color-on-performance-
Technical Reports Library; 1991. Accession No. ADA237641. Ac- with-modern-night/10.1117/12.2532485.full
cessed December 18, 2025. https://ntrl.ntis.gov/NTRL/dashboard/ 25. Angel HA, Massel LJ. Examination of the effect of night vision
searchResults/titleDetail/ADA237641.xhtml devices on rifle target engagement accuracy during bush lane en-
6. Gawron VJ, Priest JE. Night vision goggles lessons learned. Proceed- gagements. Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC)
ings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meet- Toronto; July 2005. Report No. DRDC Toronto CR 2005-
ing. 2001;45(2):176–180. doi:10.1177/154193120104500238 069. Accessed December 19, 2025. https://www.researchgate.
7. Manton AG. Night vision goggles, human factors aspects—a net/publication/268042165_DRDC_Toronto_CR-2005-069_
questionnaire survey of helicopter aircrew. R Army Med Corps. EXAMINATION_OF_THE_EFFECT_OF_NIGHT_VISION_
2000;146(1):22–27. doi:10.1136/jramc-146-01-05 DEVICES_ON_RIFLE_TARGET_ENGAGEMENT_ACCURACY_
8. Parush A, Gauthier MS, Arseneau L, Tang D. The human factors DURING_BUSH_LANE_ENGAGEMENTS
of night vision goggles: perceptual, cognitive, and physical fac- 26. Alfano PL, Michel GF. Restricting the field of view: perceptual
tors. Rev Hum Factors Ergon. 2011;7(1):238–279. doi:10.1177/ and performance effects. Percept Mot Skills. 1990;70(1):35–45.
1557234X11410392 doi:10.2466/pms.1990.70.1.35
9. Norrbrand L, Johannesson B, Grönkvist M. Increased metabolic 27. Herff C, Heger D, Fortmann O, Hennrich J, Putze F, Schultz T.
demand during nighttime walking in hilly forest terrain while Mental workload during n-back task—quantified in the pre-
wearing night vision goggles. Mil Med. 2025;190(1–2):e211– frontal cortex using fNIRS. Front Hum Neurosci. 2014;7:935.
e220. doi:10.1093/milmed/usae317 doi:10.3389/fnhum.2013.00935
10. Gauthier MS, Parush A, Macuda T, Tang D, Craig G, Jennings S. 28. Causse M, Chua Z, Peysakhovich V, Del Campo N, Matton N.
The impact of night vision goggles on way-finding performance Mental workload and neural efficiency quantified in the prefron-
and the acquisition of spatial knowledge. Hum Factors. 2008;50 tal cortex using fNIRS. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):5222. doi:10.1038/
(2):311–321. doi:10.1518/001872008X288295 s41598-017-05378-x
11. Salazar G, Temme L, Antonio JC. Civilian use of night vision gog- 29. Chen LC, Sandmann P, Thorne JD, Herrmann CS, Debener S. As-
gles. Aviat Space Environ Med. 2003;74(1):79–84. sociation of concurrent fNIRS and EEG signatures in response to

84 | JSOM Volume 26, Edition 1 / Spring 2026