Mental effort in binary categorization aided by binary cues.

Binary cueing systems assist in many tasks, often alerting people about potential hazards (such as alarms and alerts). We investigate whether cues, besides possibly improving decision accuracy, also affect the effort users invest in tasks and whether the required effort in tasks affects the responses to cues. We developed a novel experimental tool to study binary categorization performance. In two experiments, participants decided whether items on a screen were intact or faulty, based on the configuration of lighter and darker areas in items. Cues were available in half of the experimental blocks, and participants could use them in their decisions. Experimental conditions differed in the effort required to perform the task, manipulated through the contrast between lighter and darker areas (higher contrast vs. lower contrast), and in the validity of cues (medium vs. high validity). In the NASA-TLX, participants reported that with highly valid cues, they invested less effort in the task, whereas with medium validity cues, they invested similar effort as without cues. Responses to the high-validity cues were stronger than responses to the medium-validity cues. The required effort in the task did not affect the strength of responses to cues. We conclude that the invested effort may decrease when cues are available, but users will not rely more strongly on cues in more demanding situations to reduce the invested effort. We therefore recommend integrating cues into work environments, as they reduce users' effort without necessarily leading to overdependence on the cues to reduce invested effort.

[1]  George Kingsley Zipf,et al.  Human behavior and the principle of least effort , 1949 .

[2]  W. Edwards Optimal strategies for seeking information: Models for statistics, choice reaction times, and human information processing ☆ , 1965 .

[3]  D. M. Green,et al.  Signal detection theory and psychophysics , 1966 .

[4]  Christine M. Haslegrave,et al.  Industrial Inspection Efficiency and the Probability of a Defect Occurring , 1969 .

[5]  T. R. Stewart,et al.  10 – SOCIAL JUDGMENT THEORY , 1975 .

[6]  W. P. Colquhoun,et al.  Vigilance Effects in Complex Inspection , 1977 .

[7]  Daniel Gopher,et al.  On the Economy of the Human Processing System: A Model of Multiple Capacity. , 1977 .

[8]  W H Mobley,et al.  The Effects of Payoff on the Visual Processing of Dental Radiographs , 1978, Human factors.

[9]  John W. Payne,et al.  Contingent decision behavior. , 1982 .

[10]  James T. Townsend,et al.  The Stochastic Modeling of Elementary Psychological Processes , 1983 .

[11]  J. G. Hollands,et al.  Engineering Psychology and Human Performance , 1984 .

[12]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  Adaptive Strategy Selection in Decision Making. , 1988 .

[13]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[14]  Susan G. Hill,et al.  Traditional and raw task load index (TLX) correlations: Are paired comparisons necessary? In A , 1989 .

[15]  Eric J. Johnson,et al.  A componential analysis of cognitive effort in choice , 1990 .

[16]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection Theory: A User's Guide , 1991 .

[17]  Thomas E. Nygren,et al.  Psychometric Properties of Subjective Workload Measurement Techniques: Implications for Their Use in the Assessment of Perceived Mental Workload , 1991 .

[18]  C. Wickens Engineering psychology and human performance, 2nd ed. , 1992 .

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

[20]  M. Posner Attention: the mechanisms of consciousness. , 1994, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[21]  K. Mosier,et al.  Human Decision Makers and Automated Decision Aids: Made for Each Other? , 1996 .

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

[23]  L J Skitka,et al.  Automation bias: decision making and performance in high-tech cockpits. , 1997, The International journal of aviation psychology.

[24]  S Dehaene,et al.  A neuronal model of a global workspace in effortful cognitive tasks. , 1998, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[25]  Colin G. Drury,et al.  Do people choose an optimal response criterion in an inspection task , 1998 .

[26]  Kathleen L. Mosier,et al.  Does automation bias decision-making? , 1999, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[27]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation , 2000, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A.

[28]  J A Swets,et al.  Better decisions through science. , 2000, Scientific American.

[29]  Joachim Meyer,et al.  Effects of Warning Validity and Proximity on Responses to Warnings , 2001, Hum. Factors.

[30]  Joachim Meyer Task Demands and Responses to Warnings , 2002 .

[31]  D. C. Gakenheimer,et al.  The efficacy of a computerized caries detector in intraoral digital radiography. , 2002, Journal of the American Dental Association.

[32]  David Shinar,et al.  New Alternative Methods of Analyzing Human Behavior in Cued Target Acquisition , 2003, Hum. Factors.

[33]  James P. Bliss,et al.  Investigation of Alarm-Related Accidents and Incidents in Aviation , 2003 .

[34]  Joachim Meyer,et al.  Levels of automation in a simulated failure detection task , 2003, SMC'03 Conference Proceedings. 2003 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. Conference Theme - System Security and Assurance (Cat. No.03CH37483).

[35]  Wai-Tat Fu,et al.  Resolving the paradox of the active user: stable suboptimal performance in interactive tasks , 2004, Cogn. Sci..

[36]  Joachim Meyer,et al.  Conceptual Issues in the Study of Dynamic Hazard Warnings , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[37]  Nigel Harvey,et al.  Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making , 2004 .

[38]  Masha Maltz Modeling the efficacy of automated aids in target acquisition under conditions of heavy workload , 2005 .

[39]  Neil A. Macmillan,et al.  Detection theory: A user's guide, 2nd ed. , 2005 .

[40]  M. D. Dunnette Handbook of Industrial and Organizational Psychology , 2005 .

[41]  Douglas A. Wiegmann,et al.  Automation Failures on Tasks Easily Performed by Operators Undermines Trust in Automated Aids , 2003 .

[42]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Automation Reliability in Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Control: A Reliance-Compliance Model of Automation Dependence in High Workload , 2006, Hum. Factors.

[43]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  On the Independence of Compliance and Reliance: Are Automation False Alarms Worse Than Misses? , 2007, Hum. Factors.

[44]  E A Bustamante,et al.  Effects of varying the threshold of alarm systems and workload on human performance , 2007, Ergonomics.

[45]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  The benefits of imperfect diagnostic automation: a synthesis of the literature , 2007 .

[46]  Yael Edan,et al.  An objective function to evaluate performance of human-robot systems for target recognition tasks , 2007, 2007 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics.

[47]  Dietrich Manzey,et al.  Misuse of automated decision aids: Complacency, automation bias and the impact of training experience , 2008, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[48]  William M. Goldstein,et al.  Social Judgment Theory: Applying and Extending Brunswik's Probabilistic Functionalism , 2008 .

[49]  Gillian B. Yeo,et al.  Subjective cognitive effort: a model of states, traits, and time. , 2008, The Journal of applied psychology.

[50]  Tomohiro Okano,et al.  Effect of computer assistance on observer performance of approximal caries diagnosis using intraoral digital radiography , 2010, Clinical Oral Investigations.

[51]  H. Aarts,et al.  The Unconscious Eye Opener , 2009, Psychological science.

[52]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  False Alerts in Air Traffic Control Conflict Alerting System: Is There a “Cry Wolf” Effect? , 2009, Hum. Factors.

[53]  Sean M. McCrea,et al.  Match Madness: Probability Matching in Prediction of the NCAA Basketball Tournament1 , 2009 .

[54]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Complacency and Bias in Human Use of Automation: An Attentional Integration , 2010, Hum. Factors.

[55]  Francis T. Durso,et al.  Chapter 8 – Managing Workload, Performance, and Situation Awareness in Aviation Systems , 2010 .

[56]  Jason S McCarley,et al.  Effects of response bias and judgment framing on operator use of an automated aid in a target detection task. , 2011, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[57]  Arthur D. Fisk,et al.  Understanding the Effect of Workload on Automation Use for Younger and Older Adults , 2011, Hum. Factors.

[58]  M. Lee,et al.  Hierarchical diffusion models for two-choice response times. , 2011, Psychological methods.

[59]  Shrawan Kumar Advances in industrial ergonomics and safety IV , 2014 .