The Effect of Levels of Automation on Supervisory Performance in a Multi-Task Environment

Abstract

Supervisors of highly automated systems monitor the performance of numerous sub-systems and intervene only when a sub-system fails. Such intervention, or fault management, requires the collection of information from multiple, dispersed, data sources. Fault management is supported by automated data monitoring, data location, and response recommendations following sub-system failure. The present study compared fault management across various levels of automated information management in a multi-task environment. In Experiment 1, participants presented simple problems and relatively ineffective assistance, continued to consult the primary data displays with little performance improvement and no automation bias. In Experiment 2, when required to manage more complex data with an apparently reliable decision aid, performance was not improved by the decision aid but responses to false alarms increased. Workload assessed by performance on concurrent tasks did not decrease in either experiment.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Billings

C. E.

(1997). Aviation automation: The search for a human-centered approach. Mahweh, NJ: Album.

Comstock

Arnegard

R. J.

(1990). Multi-attribute task battery. NASA Langley Research Center., Langley, VA

Coury

B. G.

Semmel

R. D.

(1997). Supervisory control and the design of intelligent user interfaces. In Parasuraman

Mouloua

, Automation and Human Performance (pp. 221–242). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Endsley

(1997). Automation and situation awareness. In Parasuraman

Mouloua

, Automation and Human Performance (pp. 163–181). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

MacMillan

Young

M. J.

(1997) A comparison of alternatives for automated decision support in a multi-task environment. In Parasuraman

Mouloua

, Automation and Human Performance (pp. 190–194). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Moiser

K. L.

Skitka

L.J.

Heers

Burdick

(1998). Automation bias: Decision making and performance in high-tech cockpits. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 8, 47–63.

Molloy

Parasuraman

(1992). Monitoring automation failures: Effects of automation reliability and task complexity. Proceeding of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica CA: Human Factors Society.

Moray

(1986). Monitoring behavior and supervisory control. In Boff

K. R.

Thomas

J. P.

. Handbook of perception and human Performance (Vol. 11, pp. 40-1–40-51). New York: Wiley.

Parasuraman

(1987). Human Computer monitoring, Human Factors, 29, 695–706.

10.

Parasuraman

Bahri

Molloy

(1992). Adaptive automation and human performance: 1. Multi-task performance characteristics (Final Report No. NAWCADWAR-92035-60). Warminster, PA: Naval Air Warfare Center, Aircraft Division.

11.

Rogers

W. H.

Schutte

P. C.

Latorella

K. A.

(1997) Fault management in aviation systems. In Parasuraman

Mouloua

, Automation and Human Performance (pp. 281–317). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

12.

Sheridan

T. B.

(1987). Supervisory control. In Salvendy

, Handbook of human factors (pp. 1243–1268). New York: Wiley.

13.

John

St. Harris

W.C.

Osga

(1997). Designing for multi-tasking environments. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41st Annual Meeting, Albuquerque, NM, October.

14.

Wickens

(1992). Engineering psychology and Human Performance. New York: Harper Collins.