How do Individual Differences in Attention Control and Working Memory Capacity Relate to Monitoring Automation?

With the proliferation of automated tasks, software, and systems, humans are moving from an active participant in the function of a task to a passive monitor of an automated system that is completing that task. Unfortunately, humans are not well-suited for monitoring roles and there is a need to better understand the factors involved when humans successfully identify when an automated system fails. The goal for this research was to determine whether individual differences in attention control (as measured by the anti-saccade task) and working memory capacity (as measured by the shortened operation span) related to an individual’s ability to detect automation failures. In experiment 1, there was a significant positive relationship (r = .31) between scores on the anti-saccade task and the number of automation failures that participants detected. In experiment 2, there was a significant positive relationship (r = .32) between scores on the shortened operation span and the number of automation failures that participants’ detected. The results suggest that certain individuals are better suited for detecting automation failures. Selecting for these individuals may be a fruitful endeavor as automated systems continue to grow across society.

[1]  Jeffrey L. Foster,et al.  Shortened complex span tasks can reliably measure working memory capacity , 2015, Memory & cognition.

[2]  Frederick L Oswald,et al.  The development of a short domain-general measure of working memory capacity , 2014, Behavior Research Methods.

[3]  G. Mcreddie.  Aphasia , 1868, The Indian medical gazette.

[4]  R. Engle.  Working Memory and Executive Attention: A Revisit , 2018, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[5]  Joel S. Warm,et al.  Vigilance Requires Hard Mental Work and Is Stressful , 2008, Hum. Factors.

[6]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Monitoring an Automated System for a Single Failure: Vigilance and Task Complexity Effects , 1996, Hum. Factors.

[7]  H. J. Eysenck,et al.  Researches on the measurement of human performance. , 1951 .

[8]  Mica R. Endsley,et al.  From Here to Autonomy , 2017, Hum. Factors.

[9]  Joseph T. Coyne,et al.  Demonstrating the Supervisory Control Operations User Testbed (SCOUT) , 2016 .

[10]  Andrew R. A. Conway,et al.  A controlled-attention view of working-memory capacity. , 2001, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[11]  N. H. Mackworth,et al.  Researches on the Measurement of Human Performance. , 1950 .

[12]  N. Mackworth.  The Breakdown of Vigilance during Prolonged Visual Search 1 , 1948 .

[13]  P. Hancock,et al.  In search of vigilance: the problem of iatrogenically created psychological phenomena. , 2013, The American psychologist.

[14]  Thomas S. Redick,et al.  Measuring Working Memory Capacity With Automated Complex Span Tasks , 2012 .

[15]  R. Engle.  Working Memory Capacity as Executive Attention , 2002 .

[16]  D. Munoz,et al.  Look away: the anti-saccade task and the voluntary control of eye movement , 2004, Nature Reviews Neuroscience.