Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Humans increasingly use automated decision aids. However, environmental uncertainty means that automated advice can be incorrect, creating the potential for humans to act on incorrect advice or to disregard correct advice. We present a quantitative model of the cognitive process by which humans use automation when deciding whether aircraft would violate requirements for minimum separation. The model closely fitted the performance of 24 participants, who each made 2,400 conflict-detection decisions (conflict vs. nonconflict), either manually (with no assistance) or with the assistance of 90% reliable automation. When the decision aid was correct, conflict-detection accuracy improved, but when the decision aid was incorrect, accuracy and response time were impaired. The model indicated that participants integrated advice into their decision process by inhibiting evidence accumulation toward the task response that was incongruent with that advice, thereby ensuring that decisions could not be made solely on automated advice without first sampling information from the task environment.

Keywords

decision making automation evidence-accumulation model linear ballistic accumulator inhibition cognitive control open data

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

J. R.

Lebiere

(2014). The atomic components of thought. Psychology Press.

Bainbridge

(1983). Ironies of automation. Automatica, 19(6), 775–779. https://doi.org/10.1016/0005-1098(83)90046-8

Benjamin

D. J.

Berger

J. O.

Johannesson

Nosek

B. A.

Wagenmakers

E.-J.

Berk

Bollen

K. A.

Brembs

Brown

Camerer

. . . Johnson

V. E.

(2018). Redefine statistical significance. Nature Human Behaviour, 2(1), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0189-z

Boag

Strickland

Heathcote

Neal

Loft

(2019). Cognitive control and capacity for prospective memory in complex dynamic environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148(12), 2181–2206. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000599

Bowden

V. K.

Loft

(2016). Using memory for prior aircraft events to detect conflicts under conditions of proactive air traffic control and with concurrent task requirements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 22(2), 211–224. https://doi.org/10.1037/xap0000085

Brown

S. D.

Heathcote

(2008). The simplest complete model of choice response time: Linear ballistic accumulation. Cognitive Psychology, 57(3), 153–178. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2007.12.002

Byrne

M. D.

Pew

R. W.

(2009). A history and primer of human performance modeling. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 5(1), 225–263. https://doi.org/10.1518/155723409X448071

Endsley

M. R.

(2017). From here to autonomy: Lessons learned from human–automation research. Human Factors, 59(1), 5–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720816681350

Farrell

Lewandowsky

(2010). Computational models as aids to better reasoning in psychology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19(5), 329–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721410386677

10.

Fothergill

Loft

Neal

(2009). ATC-lab^Advanced: An air traffic control simulator with realism and control. Behavior Research Methods, 41(1), 118–127. https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.1.118

11.

Hanks

T. D.

Mazurek

M. E.

Kiani

Hopp

Shadlen

M. N.

(2011). Elapsed decision time affects the weighting of prior probability in a perceptual decision task. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31(17), 6339–6352. http://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5613-10.2011

12.

Heathcote

Lin

Y.-S.

Reynolds

Strickland

Gretton

Matzke

(2019). Dynamic models of choice. Behavior Research Methods, 51(2), 961–985. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1067-y

13.

Lebiere

Archer

Warwick

Schunk

(2005, July). Integrating modeling and simulation into a general-purpose tool [Paper presentation]. 11th International Conference on Human Computer Interaction, Las Vegas, NV.

14.

Lee

J. D.

See

K. A.

(2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46(1), 50–80. https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.46.1.50_30392

15.

Loft

Bolland

Humphreys

M. S.

Neal

(2009). A theory and model of conflict detection in air traffic control: Incorporating environmental constraints. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 15(2), 106–124. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016118

16.

Loft

Neal

Humphreys

M. S.

(2007). The development of a general associative learning account of skill acquisition in a relative arrival-time judgment task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 33(4), 938–959. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.33.4.938

17.

Loft

Sanderson

Neal

Mooij

(2007). Modeling and predicting mental workload in en route air traffic control: Critical review and broader implications. Human Factors, 49(3), 376–399. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872007X197017

18.

MacLeod

C. M.

(1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109(2), 163–203. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.109.2.163

19.

Morey

R. D.

(2008). Confidence intervals from normalized data: A correction to Cousineau (2005). Tutorials in Quantitative Methods in Psychology, 4(2), 61–64. http://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.04.2.p061

20.

Onnasch

Wickens

C. D.

Manzey

(2014). Human performance consequences of stages and levels of automation: An integrated meta-analysis. Human Factors, 56(3), 476–488. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720813501549

21.

Parasuraman

Manzey

D. H.

(2010). Complacency and bias in human use of automation: An attentional integration. Human Factors, 52(3), 381–410. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018720810376055

22.

Ratcliff

Smith

P. L.

(2004). A comparison of sequential sampling models for two-choice reaction time. Psychological Review, 111(2), 333–367. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.111.2.333

23.

Samms

(2010). Improved Performance Research Integration Tool (IMPRINT): Human performance modeling for improved system design. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 54(7), 624–625. https://doi.org/10.1177/154193121005400701

24.

Smith

P. L.

Little

D. R.

(2018). Small is beautiful: In defense of the small-N design. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(6), 2083–2101. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-018-1451-8

25.

Starreveld

P. A.

La Heij

(2017). Picture-word interference is a Stroop effect: A theoretical analysis and new empirical findings. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(3), 721–733. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-016-1167-6

26.

Strickland

Loft

Remington

R. W.

Heathcote

(2018). Racing to remember: A theory of decision control in event-based prospective memory. Psychological Review, 125(6), 851–887. https://doi.org/10.1037/rev0000113

27.

Wickens

C. D.

Dixon

S. R.

(2007). The benefits of imperfect diagnostic automation: A synthesis of the literature. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 8(3), 201–212. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639220500370105

28.

Wiener

E. L.

Curry

R. E.

(1980). Flight-deck automation: Promises and problems. Ergonomics, 23(10), 995–1011. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140138008924809

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.53 MB

Inhibitory Cognitive Control Allows Automated Advice to Improve Accuracy While Minimizing Misuse

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material