4.5 Article

Automation failures on tasks easily performed by operators undermine trust in automated aids

Journal

HUMAN FACTORS
Volume 48, Issue 2, Pages 241-256

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1518/001872006777724408

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: We tested the hypothesis that automation errors on tasks easily performed by humans undermine trust in automation. Background: Research has revealed that the reliability of imperfect automation is frequently misperceived. We examined the manner in which the easiness and type of imperfect automation errors affect trust and dependence. Method: Participants performed a target detection task utilizing an automated aid. In Study 1, the aid missed targets either on easy trials (easy miss group) or on difficult trials (difficult miss group). In Study 2, we manipulated both easiness and type of error (miss vs. false alarm). The aid erred on either difficult trials alone (difficult errors group) or on difficult and easy trials (easy miss group; easy false alarm group). Results: In both experiments, easy errors led to participants mistrusting and disagreeing more with the aid on difficult trials, as compared with those using aids that generated only difficult errors. This resulted in a downward shift in decision criterion for the former, leading to poorer overall performance. Misses and false alarms led to similar effects. Conclusion: Automation errors on tasks that appear easy to the operator severely degrade trust and reliance. Application: Potential applications include the implementation of system design solutions that circumvent the negative effects of easy automation errors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available