Abstract
The use of automated decision aids is increasing. Unfortunately, the productivity of human-automated work teams is not always superior to that of the human operator or the computer working alone (Parasuraman & Riley, 1997). In order to examine the effects of various kinds of feedback on appropriate automation use, 159 students provided with an automated aid determined whether a camouflaged soldier was present in 300 slides. A 2 (rationale why aid might err) X 2 (continuous feedback) X 2 (aid's relative performance) X 2 (aid's decision) ANOVA was performed with the transformed p(error) separately for the trials in which the target was present and for those in which the target was absent. Results indicated that participants were able to appropriately rely on the automated aid. For example, those paired with a superior aid were more likely to rely on the aid's decisions than ignore them; those paired with an inferior aid were more likely to ignore the aid than rely on it. A three way interaction indicated that this finding was most strong when participants were provided with information concerning why their aid might err, F(1, 51) = 3.27, p <. 08. Implications for future research are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.