Understanding reliance on automation: effects of error type, error distribution, age and experience

Abstract

An obstacle detection task supported by "imperfect" automation was used with the goal of understanding the effects of automation error types and age on automation reliance. Sixty younger and sixty older adults interacted with a multi-task simulation of an agricultural vehicle (i.e. a virtual harvesting combine). The simulator included an obstacle detection task and a fully manual tracking task. A micro-level analysis provided insight into the way reliance patterns change over time. The results indicated that there are distinct patterns of reliance that develop as a function of error type. A prevalence of automation false alarms led participants to under-rely on the automation during alarm states while over relying on it during non-alarms states. Conversely, a prevalence of automation misses led participants to over-rely on automated alarms and under-rely on the automation during non-alarm states. Older adults adjusted their behavior according to the characteristics of the automation similarly to younger adults, although it took them longer to do so. The results of this study suggest the relationship between automation reliability and reliance depends on the prevalence of specific errors and on the state of the system. Understanding the effects of automation detection criterion settings on human-automation interaction can help designers of automated systems make predictions about human behavior and system performance as a function of the characteristics of the automation.

Figure 1

Screenshot of simulator interface

Figure 2

Percentage of younger adults who pressed the spacebar (y-axis) across each 15 second time bin (x-axis) as a function of Error Type. Each point represents the percentage of younger adults who pressed the spacebar during alarms in the throughout condition.

Figure 3

Percentage of younger adults who pressed the spacebar (y-axis) across each 15 second time bin (x-axis) as a function of Error Type (throughout condition). Each point represents the percentage of younger adults who pressed the spacebar during non-alarms in the throughout condition.

Figure 4

Percentage of younger adults who pressed the spacebar (y-axis) across each 15 second time bin (x-axis) as a function of Error Type. Each point represents the percentage of younger adults who pressed the spacebar during alarms in the first half condition.

Figure 5

Percentage of younger adults who pressed the spacebar (y-axis) across each 15 second time bin (x-axis) as a function of Error Type. Each point represents the percentage of younger adults who pressed the spacebar during non-alarms in the First Half Condition.

Figure 6

Percentage of younger adults who pressed the spacebar (y-axis) across each 15 second time bin (x-axis) as a function of Error Type. Each point represents the percentage of younger adults who pressed the spacebar during alarms in the Second Half Condition.

Figure 7

Percentage of younger adults who pressed the spacebar (y-axis) across each 15 second time bin (x-axis) as a function of Error Type. Each point represents the percentage of younger adults who pressed the spacebar during non-alarms in the second half condition.

Figure 8

Percentage of older adults who pressed the spacebar (y-axis) across each 15 second time bin (x-axis) as a function of Error Type. Each point represents the percentage of older adults who pressed the spacebar during alarms in the throughout condition.

Figure 9

Percentage of older adults who pressed the spacebar (y-axis) across each 15 second time bin (x-axis) as a function of Error Type. Each point represents the percentage of older adults who pressed the spacebar during non-alarms in the throughout condition.

Figure 10

Percentage of farmers who pressed the spacebar (y-axis) across each 15 second time bin (x-axis) as a function of Error Type. Each point represents the percentage of farmers who pressed the spacebar during alarms in the throughout condition.

Figure 11

Percentage of farmers who pressed the spacebar (y-axis) across each 15 second time bin (x-axis) as a function of Error Type. Each point represents the percentage of farmers who pressed the spacebar during non-alarms in the throughout condition.