Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study investigates human-AI teaming requirements in the context of ill-structured replanning tasks, where evolving goals, ambiguous constraints, and shifting environmental states create coordination demands with AI agents. We conducted a high-fidelity staged world experiment using a driver-in-the-loop simulation, wherein participants completed two event-driven driving scenarios to explore how AI capabilities can aid cognitive work of drivers. These prototypes embodied distinct functionality and coordination strategies grounded in a Flexecution model of replanning. Our analysis draws from post-hoc interviews to evaluate how participants navigated the trade space between the cognitive benefits of AI support and the coordination overhead of engaging with the system. Results reveal that environmental events modulate interaction strategies and suggest design implications for AI teammates that better support human adaptation under varying workload conditions and temporal constraints.

Keywords

situated cognition human-automation interaction team coordination staged world experiment joint replanning flexecution

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Hargis

IJtsma

. (2024). Functional models of work to examine human-robot coordination in disaster response. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 68(1), Article 10711813241276478. https://doi.org/10.1177/10711813241276478

Hollnagel

(1993). Contextual control models of cognition. In Hollnagel

(Ed.), Human reliability analysis: Context and control (pp. 315–326). Academic Press.

Hollnagel

(2002). Time and time again. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3(2), 143–158. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639220210124111

Johnson

Bradshaw

J. M.

Feltovich

P. J.

Jonker

C. M.

Van Riemsdijk

M. B.

Sierhuis

(2014). Coactive Design: Designing support for interdependence in joint activity. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, 3(1), 43. https://doi.org/10.5898/JHRI.3.1.Johnson

Johnson

Vera

A. H.

(2019). No AI is an island: The case for teaming intelligence. AI Magazine, 40(1), 16–28.

Klein

(2007). Flexecution, Part 2: Understanding and supporting flexible execution. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 22(6), 108–112. https://doi.org/10.1109/MIS.2007.107

MacMillan

Entin

E. E.

Serfaty

(2004). Communication overhead: The hidden cost of team cognition. In Salas

Fiore

S. M.

(Eds.), Team cognition: Understanding the factors that drive process and performance (pp. 61–82). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10690-004

Straub

V. J.

Tsvetkova

Yasseri

(2023). The cost of coordination can exceed the benefit of collaboration in performing complex tasks. Collective Intelligence, 2(2), 26339137231156912.

Woods

D. D

. (2003). Discovering how distributed cognitive systems work. In Hollnagel

(Ed.), Handbook of cognitive task design (pp. 37–53). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781410607775.ch3

10.

Woods

D. D.

Dekker

(2000). Anticipating the effects of technological change: A new era of dynamics for human factors. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 1(3), 272–282. https://doi.org/10.1080/14639220110037452

11.

Woods

D. D.

Hollnagel

(2006). Joint cognitive systems: Patterns in cognitive systems engineering. CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781420005684

12.

Woods

D. D.

Patterson

E. S.

(2001). How unexpected events produce an escalation of cognitive and coordinative demands. In Hancock

P. A.

Desmond

P. A.

(Eds.), Stress, workload, and fatigue. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

A Driver-in-the-Loop Study of Human-AI Joint Replanning

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References