Concurrent performance of military tasks and robotics tasks: Effects of automation unreliability and individual differences

This study investigated the performance and workload of the combined position of gunner and robotics operator in a simulated military multitasking environment. Specifically, we investigated how aided target recognition (AiTR) capabilities for the gunnery task with imperfect reliability (false-alarm-prone vs. miss-prone) might affect the concurrent robotics and communication tasks. Additionally, we examined whether performance was affected by individual differences in spatial ability and attentional control. Results showed that when the robotics task was simply monitoring the video, participants had the best performance in their gunnery and communication tasks and the lowest perceived workload, compared with the other robotics tasking conditions. There was a strong interaction between the type of AiTR unreliability and participants' perceived attentional control. Overall, for participants with higher perceived attentional control, false-alarm-prone alerts were more detrimental; for low attentional control participants, conversely, miss-prone automation was more harmful. Low spatial ability participants preferred visual cueing, and high spatial ability participants favored tactile cueing. Potential applications of the findings include personnel selection for robotics operation, robotics user interface designs, and training development.

[1]  Jessie Y. C. Chen,et al.  Human Performance Issues and User Interface Design for Teleoperated Robots , 2007, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews).

[2]  Juliana Goh,et al.  Pilot Dependence on Imperfect Diagnostic Automation in Simulated UAV Flights: An Attentional Visual Scanning Analysis. , 2005 .

[3]  Mary Hegarty,et al.  Revising the Visualizer-Verbalizer Dimension: Evidence for Two Types of Visualizers , 2002 .

[4]  John D. Lee,et al.  Trust, self-confidence, and operators' adaptation to automation , 1994, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[5]  Salvatore P Schipani,et al.  An Evaluation of Operator Workload, During Partially-Autonomous Vehicle Operations , 2003 .

[6]  Corinna E. Lathan,et al.  The Effects of Operator Spatial Perception and Sensory Feedback on Human-Robot Teleoperation Performance , 2002, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[7]  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.

[8]  H. Harman,et al.  Kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests , 1976 .

[9]  Carla T. Joyner,et al.  Concurrent Performance of Gunner's and Robotics Operator's Tasks in a Multitasking Environment , 2009 .

[10]  Stephen R. Dixon,et al.  UAV Automation : Influence of Task Priorities and Automation Imperfection in a Difficult Surveillance Task , 2005 .

[11]  Christopher D. Wickens,et al.  Eye-tracking and Individual Differences in off-Normal Event Detection when Flying with a Synthetic Vision System Display , 2004 .

[12]  D. Meyer,et al.  Executive control of cognitive processes in task switching. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  David P. Biros,et al.  The Influence of Task Load and Automation Trust on Deception Detection , 2004 .

[14]  Mark H. Draper,et al.  11. Multi-Sensory Interfaces for Remotely Operated Vehicles , 2006 .

[15]  Paula J. Durlach,et al.  Human–Robot Interaction in the Context of Simulated Route Reconnaissance Missions , 2008 .

[16]  John D. Lee,et al.  Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance , 2004, Hum. Factors.

[17]  Jessie Y. C. Chen,et al.  Concurrent Performance of Gunner's and Robotic Operator's Tasks in a Simulated Mounted Combat System Environment , 2006 .

[18]  L. Gugerty,et al.  Reference-frame misalignment and cardinal direction judgments: group differences and strategies. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

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

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

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

[22]  M Naveh-Benjamin,et al.  The Effects of Divided Attention on Encoding and Retrieval Processes: The Resiliency of Retrieval Processes , 2000, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[23]  D. Derryberry,et al.  Anxiety-related attentional biases and their regulation by attentional control. , 2002, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[24]  Mark R. Lehto,et al.  Foundations for an Empirically Determined Scale of Trust in Automated Systems , 2000 .

[25]  Jessie Y. C. Chen,et al.  Robotics operator performance in a military multi-tasking environment , 2008, 2008 3rd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[26]  E LathanCorinna,et al.  The effects of operator spatial perception and sensory feedback on human-robot teleoperation performance , 2002 .