Automation-Related “Complacency”: Theory, Empirical Data, and Design Implications

With the introduction of advanced automation into many human-machine systems, the human is often left to monitor the automation. However, human monitoring of automated systems can be poor, especially when the operator has to accomplish other tasks (Parasuraman, Molloy & Singh, 1993). Several explanations for these automation-related monitoring inefficiencies (“complacency”) have been put forward. One view (Parasuraman et al., 1993) suggests that complacency reflects an attention allocation strategy away from the automated system due to high trust in the automation. Empirical data from two studies using eye movement recording are presented to test this theory. In the first study, students were tested on a PC-based simulation of flight-related tasks. In the second study, professional air traffic controllers performed on a medium-fidelity ATC simulator. The results supported an attentional interpretation of automation-related complacency. Implications for the design of automated systems are discussed.

[1]  Lawrence J. Kamm.  Designing for Automation , 1991 .

[2]  D. Gopher,et al.  Practice under changing priorities: An approach to the training of complex skills☆ , 1989 .

[3]  Rita McCardell Doerr,et al.  Generation , 2015, Aristotle on Substance.

[4]  M. Posner,et al.  Orienting of Attention* , 1980, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[5]  N. J. Slamecka,et al.  The Generation Effect: Delineation of a Phenomenon , 1978 .

[6]  Neville Moray.  Are Observers Ever Really Complacent When Monitoring Automated Systems? , 2000 .

[7]  R Parasuraman,et al.  Designing automation for human use: empirical studies and quantitative models , 2000, Ergonomics.

[8]  R. Parasuraman,et al.  Effects of Variable-Priority Training on Automation-Related Complacency: Performance and Eye Movements , 2000 .

[9]  Alice F. Healy,et al.  Learning and memory of knowledge and skills : durability and specificity , 1995 .

[10]  C. L. M..  The Psychology of Attention , 1890, Nature.

[11]  N. Moray.  Designing for attention. , 1993 .

[12]  Peter A. Hancock,et al.  Air Traffic Control Workstation Mock-Up for Free Flight Experimentation: Lab Development and Capabilities , 1997 .

[13]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Performance Consequences of Automation-Induced 'Complacency' , 1993 .

[14]  Mustapha Mouloua,et al.  Effects of Adaptive Task Allocation on Monitoring of Automated Systems , 1996, Hum. Factors.

[15]  D Gopher,et al.  Attention control: explorations of the work of an executive controller. , 1996, Brain research. Cognitive brain research.

[16]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Humans and Automation: Use, Misuse, Disuse, Abuse , 1997, Hum. Factors.

[17]  Nadine B. Sarter,et al.  Good Vibrations: Tactile Feedback in Support of Attention Allocation and Human-Automation Coordination in Event-Driven Domains , 1999, Hum. Factors.

[18]  R I Thackray,et al.  Detection efficiency on an air traffic control monitoring task with and without computer aiding. , 1989, Aviation, space, and environmental medicine.