The Perceived Utility of Human and Automated Aids in a Visual Detection Task

• Published in: Human factors Vol. 44; no. 1; pp. 79 - 94
• Main Authors: Dzindolet, Mary T., Pierce, Linda G., Beck, Hall P., Dawe, Lloyd A.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.03.2002; Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
• Subjects: Adult; Audiovisual Aids; Biological and medical sciences; Decision Making; Ergonomics. Human factors; Feedback; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology; Humans; Occupational psychology; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychology. Psychophysiology; Reproducibility of Results; Space life sciences; Task Performance and Analysis; Human; Automation; Utility; Ergonomics; Vision; Decision aid; Computer; Perception; Man machine relation; Cognition; Detection
• ISSN: 0018-7208; 1547-8181
• DOI: 10.1518/0018720024494856

Although increases in the use of automation have occurred across society, research has found that human operators often underutilize (disuse) and overly rely on (misuse) automated aids (R. Parasuraman & V. Riley, 1997). Nearly 275 Cameron University students participated in 1 of 3 experiments performed to examine the effects of perceived utility (M. T. Dzindolet, H. P. Beck, L. G. Pierce, & L. A. Dawe, 2001) on automation use in a visual detection task and to compare reliance on automated aids with reliance on humans. Results revealed a bias for human operators to rely on themselves. Although self-report data indicate a bias toward automated aids over human aids, performance data revealed that participants were more likely to disuse automated aids than to disuse human aids. This discrepancy was accounted for by assuming human operators have a "perfect automation" schema. Actual or potential applications of this research include the design of future automated decision aids and training procedures for operators relying on such aids.