The Relationship of Self-Efficacy and Complacency in Pilot-Automation Interaction

Pilot 'complacency' has been implicated as a contributing factor in numerous aviation accidents and incidents. The term has become more prominent with the increase in automation technology in modern cockpits and, therefore, research has been focused on understanding the factors that may mitigate its effect on pilot-automation interaction. The study examined self-efficacy of supervisory monitoring and the relationship between complacency on strategy of pilot use of automation for workload management under automation schedules that produce the potential for complacency. The results showed that self-efficacy can be a 'double-edged' sword in reducing potential for automation-induced complacency but limiting workload management strategies and increasing other hazardous states of awareness.

[1]  Victor A. Riley,et al.  A General Model of Mixed-Initiative Human-Machine Systems , 1989 .

[2]  Sarah Milne.  Self-efficacy in changing societies , 1999, Journal of health psychology.

[3]  N Moray,et al.  Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. , 1992, Ergonomics.

[4]  Mark W. Scerbo,et al.  The Effects of Complacency Potential and Boredom Proneness on Perceived Workload and Task Performance in an Automated Environment , 1998 .

[5]  Renwick E. Curry,et al.  Flight-deck automation: promises and problems , 1980 .

[6]  J. R. Comstock.  MAT - MULTI-ATTRIBUTE TASK BATTERY FOR HUMAN OPERATOR WORKLOAD AND STRATEGIC BEHAVIOR RESEARCH , 1994 .

[7]  I. Singh,et al.  Individual differences in monitoring failures of automation , 1993 .

[8]  Alan T. Pope,et al.  Identification of Hazardous Awareness States in Monitoring Environments , 1992 .

[9]  N. Moray,et al.  Trust in automation. Part II. Experimental studies of trust and human intervention in a process control simulation. , 1996, Ergonomics.

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

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

[12]  Mark W. Scerbo,et al.  Effects of Instruction Type and Boredom Proneness in Vigilance: Implications for Boredom and Workload , 1995, Hum. Factors.

[13]  D. Damos,et al.  Response Strategies and Individual Differences in Multiple-Task Performance. , 1981 .

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

[15]  D. H. Mills.  The Logic and Limits of Trust , 1983 .

[16]  R. Parasuraman,et al.  Psychophysiology and adaptive automation , 1996, Biological Psychology.

[17]  Bonnie M. Muir,et al.  Trust Between Humans and Machines, and the Design of Decision Aids , 1987, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[18]  H. McIlvaine Parsons,et al.  Automation and the Individual: Comprehensive and Comparative Views , 1985 .

[19]  Richard P. Will,et al.  True and false dependence on technology: Evaluation with an expert system , 1991 .

[20]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Automation-induced monitoring inefficiency: role of display location , 1997, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[21]  V. David Hopkin,et al.  Human factors in certification , 2000 .

[22]  L. Prinzel,et al.  The Double-Edged Sword of Self-Efficacy: Implications for Automation-Induced Complacency , 2000 .

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

[24]  R. Parasuraman,et al.  Sensory and Cognitive Vigilance: Effects of Age on Performance and Subjective Workload , 1993 .

[25]  D. Damos,et al.  Individual Differences in Multiple-Task Performance as a Function of Response Strategy , 1983, Human factors.

[26]  Charles E. Billings,et al.  Aviation Automation: The Search for A Human-centered Approach , 1996 .

[27]  W. N. Dember,et al.  Sex differences in vigilance performance and perceived workload. , 1993, The Journal of general psychology.

[28]  Victor A. Riley,et al.  Operator reliance on automation: Theory and data. , 1996 .

[29]  L. Prinzel,et al.  Task-Specific Sex Differences in Vigilance Performance: Subjective Workload and Boredom , 1997, Perceptual and motor skills.

[30]  D. Broadbent,et al.  The Cognitive Failures Questionnaire (CFQ) and its correlates. , 1982, The British journal of clinical psychology.

[31]  M. Loeb,et al.  The Psychology of Vigilance , 1982 .

[32]  R. Farmer,et al.  Boredom proneness--the development and correlates of a new scale. , 1986, Journal of personality assessment.

[33]  David A. Sawin,et al.  The Effects of Subject-Controlled Pacing and Task Type on Sustained Attention and Subjective Workload , 1993 .

[34]  David A. Sawin,et al.  Vigilance: How to Do it and Who Should Do it , 1994 .

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

[36]  Bonnie M. Muir,et al.  Trust in automation. I: Theoretical issues in the study of trust and human intervention in automated systems , 1994 .

[37]  E. G. Lyman,et al.  NASA aviation safety reporting system , 1976 .

[38]  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.

[39]  A. Bandura.  Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory , 1985 .

[40]  Raja Parasuraman,et al.  Automation- Induced "Complacency": Development of the Complacency-Potential Rating Scale , 1993 .

[41]  Earl L. Wiener,et al.  Human factors of advanced technology (glass cockpit) transport aircraft , 1989 .

[42]  F. T. Eggemeier.  Properties of Workload Assessment Techniques , 1988 .