Human-Automation Interaction

Abstract

Automation does not mean humans are replaced; quite the opposite. Increasingly, humans are asked to interact with automation in complex and typically large-scale systems, including aircraft and air traffic control, nuclear power, manufacturing plants, military systems, homes, and hospitals. This is not an easy or error-free task for either the system designer or the human operator/automation supervisor, especially as computer technology becomes ever more sophisticated. This review outlines recent research and challenges in the area, including taxonomies and qualitative models of human-automation interaction; descriptions of automation-related accidents and studies of adaptive automation; and social, political, and ethical issues.

Land Administration and Automation in Uganda

“…Sheridan (2002) offers varied conceptualizations of automation, such as data processing and decision making by computers, while Moray, Inagaki and Itoh (2000) perceive it to be any sensing, information processing, decision making and control action that could be performed by humans, but is actually performed by machines. As Sheridan and Parasuraman (2006), and earlier Kaber and Endsley (2000), contended, human-automation interaction explains the complex and large scale use of automation in various fields. Further, it explains the ability of humans to interact with adaptive automation in information processing, hence enhancing the achievement of optimal performance within an organization.…”

Drivers’ Reliance on Lane-Keeping Assistance Systems as a Function of the Level of Assistance

“…There are concerns that operators may increasingly rely on automation when a greater portion of a task is automated, also referred to as overreliance or misuse of automation (Parasuraman & Riley, 1997;Sheridan & Parasuraman, 2005). Such concerns are supported by empirical studies in which the reliability of an automated system was manipulated.…”

Development of an Initial Model of Human-Automatio

“…Though some studies have successfully employed adaptive automation using a specific triggering condition (e.g., Parasuraman et al, 2009), there has not been a great deal of research on the relative merits of the various triggering conditions for adaptive automation (Kaber, 2012;), yet their importance to human-automation collaboration is widely acknowledged (Kaber, 2012;Sheridan & Parasuraman, 2005). Since there are relative benefits and disadvantages to each type of techniques mentioned in Section 2.2.7, several authors have recommended the use of hybrid methods to ensure that automation is initiated (or changed) when it should be (Parasuraman et al, 1996;Sheridan & Parasuraman, 2005).…”

“…Since there are relative benefits and disadvantages to each type of techniques mentioned in Section 2.2.7, several authors have recommended the use of hybrid methods to ensure that automation is initiated (or changed) when it should be (Parasuraman et al, 1996;Sheridan & Parasuraman, 2005). Hybrid may lead to a more robust, resilient system that is less subject to potential problems or errors of individual triggers.…”

“…However, if decision making was delegated to the automated tools, then air traffic controllers reported that they would likely reject automation. Sheridan and Parasuraman (2005) identified "perceived understandability" of automation as a factor impacting the operator's perceived reliability of automation and its acceptance and use. Understandability refers to the ability of the operator to "form a mental model and predict future system behavior."…”