The implementation of automation relies on the assumption that automation will reduce the operator’s cognitive demand and improve performance. However, accepted models demonstrate the multidimensionality of cognitive resources, suggesting that automation must support an appropriate resource dimension to have an appreciable effect. To evaluate this theory, the present study examined the impact of various types of automation on an unmanned ground vehicle (UGV) operator’s performance, workload, and stress. The use of a visually demanding task allowed for comparison between an auditory alert (supporting the heavily burdened visual dimension) and a driving aid (supporting action execution, a relatively unburdened cognitive dimension). Static and adaptive (fluctuating based on task demand) levels were implemented for each automation type. Those receiving auditory alerts exhibited better performance and reduced Worry, but also increased Temporal Demand and Effort relative to those receiving driving automation. Adaptive automation reduced workload for those receiving the auditory alerts, and increased workload for those receiving the driving automation. The results from this research demonstrate the need to consider the multidimensionality of the operator’s cognitive resources when implementing automation into a system. System designers should consider the type of automation necessary to support the specific cognitive resources burdened by the task.
BarberD.LeontyevS.SunB.DavisL.NicholsonD.ChenJ. Y. C. (2008, May). The Mixed Initiative Experimental (MIX) testbed for collaborative human robot interactions. Paper presented at the Army Science Conference, Orlando, FL.
ChuaE. C.-P.TanW.-Q.YeoS.-C.LauP.LeeI.MienI. H.. . . GooleyJ. J. (2012). Heart rate variability can be used to estimate sleepiness-related decrements in psychomotor vigilance during total sleep deprivation. Sleep, 35, 325–334. doi:10.5665/sleep.1688
4.
CosenzoK. A.ChenJ. Y. C.DrexlerJ. M.BarnesM. J.HudsonI.NicholsonD. (2010, November–December). Dynamic task allocation for secure mobility to enhance soldier effectiveness. Proceedings of the BiAnnual Army Science Conference. Paper presented at the Army Science. Conference, Orlando, FL.
5.
CosenzoK. A.ChenJ. Y. C.Reinerman-JonesL. E.BarnesM. J.NicholsonD. (2010). Adaptive automation effects on operator performance during a reconnaissance mission with an unmanned ground vehicle. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 54, pp. 2135–2139). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. doi:10.1177/154193121005402503
6.
CummingsM. L.GuerlainS. (2007). Developing operator capacity estimates for supervisory control of autonomous vehicles. Human Factors, 49, 1–15.
7.
Department of Defense. (2005). Department of Defense interface standard: Common Warfighter symbology (MIL-STD-2525B). Washington, DC: Author.
8.
GriffithsP. G.GillespieR. B. (2005). Sharing control between humans and automation using haptic interface: Primary and secondary task performance benefits. Human Factors, 47, 574–590. doi:10.1518/001872005774859944
9.
HancockP. A.ChignellM. H. (1987). Adaptive control in human–machine systems. In HancockP. A. (Ed.), Human factors psychology (pp. 305–345). Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland.
10.
HancockP. A.WarmJ. S. (1989). A dynamic model of stress and sustained attention. Human Factors, 31, 519–537.
11.
HartS. G.StavelandL. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In HancockP. A.MeshkatiN. (Eds.), Human mental workload (pp. 139–184). Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier Science.
12.
HeltonW. S. (2004). Validation of a Short Stress State Questionnaire. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting (pp. 1238–1242). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
13.
HilburnB.MolloyR.WongD.ParasuramanR. (1993). Operator versus computer control of adaptive automation. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (pp. 161–166). Columbus: Department of Aviation, Aviation Psychology Laboratory, Ohio State University.
14.
HockeyG. R. J. (1997). Compensatory control in the regulation of human performance under stress and high workload: A cognitive-energetical framework. Biological Psychology, 45, 73–93. doi:10.1016/S0301-0511(96)05223-4
15.
HockeyG. R. J.GaillardA. W. K.ColesM. G. H. (Eds.). (1986). Energetics and human information processing. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff.
16.
IsrealJ. B.ChesneyG. L.WickensC. D.DonchinE. (1980). P300 and tracking difficulty: Evidence for multiple resources in dual-task performance. Psychophysiology, 17, 259–273. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1980.tb00146.x
17.
KaberD. B.PerryC.SegallN.McClernonC.PrinzelL. J. (2006). Situation awareness implications of adaptive automation for information processing in an air traffic control-related task. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 36, 447–462. doi:10.1016/j.ergon.2006.01.008
18.
KaberD. B.WrightM. C.PrinzelL. J.ClamannM. P. (2005). Adaptive automation of human-machine system information-processing functions. Human Factors, 47, 730–741. doi:10.1518/001872005775570989
19.
KaberD. B.WrightM. C.Sheik-NainarM. A. (2006). Investigation of multi-modal interface features for adaptive automation of a human–robot system. International Journal of Human–Computer Studies, 64, 527–540. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.11.003
20.
KahnemanD. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
KirlikA. (1993). Modeling strategic behavior in human-automation interaction: Why an “aid” can (and should) go unused. Human Factors, 35, 221–242. doi:10.1177/001872089303500203
23.
MatthewsG.CampbellS.FalconerS.JoynerL.HugginsJ.GillilandK.. . . WarmJ. S. (2002). Fundamental dimensions of subjective state in performance settings: Task engagement, distress, and worry. Emotion, 2, 315–340.
24.
MatthewsG.JoynerL.GillilandK.CampbellS.FalconerS.HugginsJ. (1999). Validation of a comprehensive stress state questionnaire: Towards a state “Big Three”? In MervieldeI.DearyI. J.FruytF. DeOstendorfF. (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe (Vol. 7, pp. 335–350). Tilburg, Netherlands: Tilburg University Press.
25.
MatthewsG.WarmJ. S.Reinerman-JonesL. E.LangheimL. K.WashburnD. A.TrippL. (2010). Task engagement, cerebral blood flow velocity, and diagnostic monitoring for sustained attention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 16, 187–203. doi:10.1037/a0019572
26.
OppermanR. (1994). Adaptive user support. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
27.
ParasuramanR. (1987). Human-computer monitoring. Human Factors, 29, 695–706.
28.
ParasuramanR.BahriT.MolloyR.SinghI. (1991). Effects of shifts in the level of automation on operator performance. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (pp. 102–107). Columbus: Department of Aviation, Aviation Psychology Laboratory, Ohio State University.
29.
ParasuramanR.RileyV. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors, 39, 230–253. doi:10.1518/001872097778543886
30.
ParasuramanR.SheridanT. B.WickensC. D. (2000). A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics–Part A: Systems and Humans, 30, 286–297. doi:10.1109/3468.844354
Reinerman-JonesL. E.BarberD.LackeyS.NicholsonD. (2010, July). Developing methods for utilizing physiological measures. Paper presented at the Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Conference, Miami, FL.
33.
Reinerman-JonesL. E.MatthewsG.LangheimL. K.WarmJ. S. (2011). Selection for vigilance assignments: A review and proposed new direction. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 12, 273–296. doi:10.1080/14639221003622620
34.
Reinerman-JonesL. E.TaylorG. S.SprouseK.BarberD.HudsonI. (2011). Adaptive automation as a task switching and task congruence challenge. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 55th Annual Meeting (pp. 197–201). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
35.
RouseW. B. (1977). Human-computer interaction in multitask situations. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 7, 384–392. doi:10.1109/TSMC.1977.4309727
36.
RouseW. B. (1988). Adaptive aiding for human/computer control. Human Factors, 30, 431–443.
37.
ScerboM. W. (2001). Adaptive automation. In KarwoskiW. (Ed.), International encyclopedia of ergonomics and human factors (pp. 1077–1079). London, UK: Taylor and Francis.
38.
SheridanT. B. (1992). Telerobotics, automation, and human supervisory control. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39.
SheridanT. B. (1997). Supervisory control. In SalvendyG. (Ed.), Handbook of human factors and ergonomics (2nd ed., pp. 1295–1327). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
40.
SzalmaJ. L.TaylorG. S. (2011). Individual differences in response to automation: The five factor model of personality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17, 71–96.
41.
TanK.ChanK.ChoiK. (2000, September). Detection of the QRS complex, P wave and T wave in electrocardiogram. In First International Conference on Advances in Medical Signal and Information Processing (pp. 41–47). Paper presented at the International Conference on Advances in Medical Signal and Information Processing, Bristol, UK.
42.
TannenR. S.NelsonW. T.BoliaR. S.HaasM. W.HettingerL. J.WarmJ. S.. . . StoffregenT. A. (2000). Adaptive integration of head-coupled multi-sensory displays for target localization. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 44th Annual Meeting (pp. 77–80). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. doi:10.1177/154193120004401320
43.
TaylorG. S.Reinerman-JonesL. E.CosenzoK. A.NicholsonD. (2010). Comparison of multiple physiological sensors to classify operator state in adaptive automation systems. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 54th Annual Meeting (pp. 195–199). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
U.S. Army UAS Center of Excellence. (2010). U.S. Army roadmap for unmanned aircraft systems. Fort Rucker, AL: Author.
46.
WickensC. D. (1976). The effects of divided attention on information processing in manual tracking. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 2, 1–13. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.2.1.1
47.
WickensC. D. (1980). The structure of attentional resources. In NickersonR. (Ed.), Attention and performance VIII (pp. 239–257). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
48.
WickensC. D. (1984). Processing resources in attention. In ParasuramanR.DaviesD. R. (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 63–101). New York, NY: Academic Press.
49.
WickensC. D. (2008). Multiple resources and mental workload. Human Factors, 50, 449–455.
50.
WickensC. D.LiH.SantamariaA.SebokA.SarterN. B. (2010). Stages and levels of automation: An integrated meta-analysis. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 54th Annual Meeting (pp. 389–393). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
51.
WilsonG. F. (1992). Applied use of cardiac and respiration measures: Practical considerations and precautions. Biological Psychology, 34, 163–178. doi:10.1016/0301-0511(92)90014-L
52.
YehY.WickensC. D. (1988). Dissociation of performance and subjective measures of workload. Human Factors, 30, 111–120.
