Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Recent research has shown that the use of 3-stage likelihood alarm systems (LAS) has the potential to mitigate performance deficits associated with the use of binary alarm systems (BAS). The additional likelihood information can guide operators’ behavior and improve their decision-making accuracy. Comparisons of LAS with different numbers of stages are missing so far. Therefore, the current study compared a BAS with a 3-stage LAS and a 4-stage LAS. Participants were found to make significantly fewer wrong decisions with the 4-stage LAS than with the other two systems, and still significantly fewer errors with the 3-stage LAS compared to the BAS. We found that this performance benefit resulted from a reduced number of false alarms, whereas no difference was found with regard to misses. Results are further discussed with regard to their theoretical implications for LAS and threshold setting in BAS.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bliss

J. P.

Gilson

R. D.

Deaton

J. E.

(1995). Human probability matching behaviour in response to alarms of varying reliability. Ergonomics, 38, 2300–2312.

Breznitz

(1984). Cry wolf: The psychology of false alarms. Hillsdale, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bustamante

E.A.

(2008). Implementing Likelihood Alarm Technology in Integrated Aviation displays for Enhancing Decision-Making: A Two-Stage signal Detection Modeling Approach. International Journal of Applied Aviation Studies, 8, 241-261.

Bustamante

E. A.

Bliss

J. P.

(2005). Effects of workload and likelihood information on human response to alarm signals. In Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (pp. 81–85). Oklahoma City, OK: Wright State University.

Bustamante

E. A.

Clark

R. M.

(2010). Differential Effects of Likelihood Alarm Technology, Type of Automation, and Type of Task on Decision Making as Applied to Aviation and UAS Operations. International Journal of Applied Aviation Studies, 10(1), 51.

Clark

R. M.

Peyton

G. G.

Bustamante

E. A.

(2009). Differential effects of likelihood alarm technology and false-alarm vs. miss prone automation on decision making. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 53, pp. 349–353). Sage Publications.

Gérard

Manzey

(2010). Are false alarms not as bad as supposed after all? A study investigating operators’ responses to imperfect alarms. In de Waard

Axelsson

Berglund

Peters

Weikert

(Ed.), Human factors. A system view of human, technology and organisation (pp. 55–69). Maastricht: Shaker.

Getty

Swets

J. A.

Pickett

R. M.

Gonthier

(1995). System operator response to warnings of danger: A laboratory investigation of the effects of the predictive value of a warning on human response time. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 1(1), 19–33.

Merkel

Wiczorek

(2012). Does higher security always result in better protection? An approach for mitigating the trade-off between usability and security. In Waard

Brookhuis

Dehais

Weikert

Röttger

Manzey

Biede

Reuzeau

Terrier

(Ed.), Human Factors: a view from an integrative perspective (pp.1-13).

10.

Parasuraman

Hancock

P. A.

Olofinboba

(1997). Alarm effectiveness in driver-centred collision-warning systems. Ergonomics, 40(3), 390–399.

11.

Ragsdale

Lew

Dyre

B. P.

Boring

R. L.

(2012). Fault Diagnosis with Multi-State Alarms in a Nuclear Power Control Simulator. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 56, No. 1, pp. 2167-2171). Sage Publications.

12.

Sorkin

R.D.

Kantowitz

B.H.

Kantowitz

S.C.

(1988). Likelihood alarm displays. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society,30, 445-459.

13.

Swets

J.A.

(1964). Signal detection and recognition by human observers. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

14.

Vargas

J. C.

Bustamante

E. A.

(2011). Moderating Effects of Alarm Technology, Type of Automation, and Information Processing Stage on Decision Making in UAS Operations. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 26-30). Sage Publications.

15.

Wiczorek

Manzey

(2011). Evaluating Likelihood Alarm Systems as an Alternative to Binary Alarm Systems. In Waard

Gérard

Onnasch

Wiczorek

Manzey

(Ed.), Human centred automation (pp.69-83). Maastricht: Shaker Publishing.

16.

Wiczorek

Manzey

(2014). Supporting attention allocation in multi-task environments: Effects of likelihood alarm systems on trust, behavior, and performance. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 0018720814528534.

Benefits of Decision-Support by Likelihood versus Binary Alarm Systems

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References