The future vision of military robotics is one in which robots will serve as integrated members of Soldier—robot teams. Robots will possess capabilities that will transition their role from functional tools to working teammates. Because robots and Soldiers will be deployed in environments characterized by uncertainty, complexity, and violence, it is imperative that Soldiers have accurate mental models of what their robotic teammates can do, cannot do, and will likely do. In this paper, we present the conclusions of a review into metaphors for facilitating accurate mental models of robotic teammates. Emphasis was placed on investigating existing human—technology teams (i.e., human teaming with automated systems including autopilot in cockpits, driver assistance systems, and personal assistant applications among others) for features that can support accurate mental models for Soldiers in future Soldier—robot teams.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArmstrongD. (2013, September13). Emotional attachment to robots could affect outcome on battlefield. Press release, University of Washington.
BruemmerD.FewD.GoodrichM.NormanD.SarkarN.ScholtzJ.YancoH. (2004). How to trust robots farther than we can throw them. In CHI’ 04 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 1576-1577). ACM.
4.
Cannon-BowersJ.SalasE. (2001). Reflections on shared cognition. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 195-202.
5.
de WinterJ. C. F.DodouD. (2011). Why the Fitts list has persisted throughout the history of function allocation. Cognition, Technology, & Work, 1-11.
6.
DoshiA.ChengS.Y.TrivediM. M. (2009). A novel heads-up display for driver assistance. Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B: Cybernetics, IEEE Transactions on, 39(1), 85-93.
7.
FincannonT.LeotaudP.OsoskyS.JentschF. (2011). Using sheepdog trials as a mental model metaphor for human interaction with an intelligent robot. University of Central Florida: Orlando, FL.
8.
FountainH., (2012, October26). Yes, dirverless cars know the way to San Jose. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com
9.
GroomV.NassC. (2007). Can robots be teammates?: Benchmarks in human—robot teams. Interaction Studies, 8(3), 483-500.
10.
KieslerS.GoetzJ. (2002). Mental models of robotic assistants. Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI2002). Minneapolis, MN, 576–577.
11.
OsoskyS. (2013). The influence of task role mental model on human interpretation of robot behavior. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL.
12.
OsoskyS.SchusterD.PhillipsE.JentschF. (2013). Building appropriate trust in human—robot teams. In Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Spring Symposium (pp. 60-65), Palo Alto, CA: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence.
13.
ParasuramanR.MolloyR.IndramaniS.L. (1993). Performance consequences of automation-induced “Complacency”. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3(1), 1-23.
14.
MathieuJ. E.HeffnerT. S.GoodwinG. F.SalasE.Cannon-BowersJ. A. (2000). The influence of shared mental models on team process and performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85, 273-283.
15.
MonteF.CorriveauA.DuboisV. (2007). U.S. Patent No. 7,286,888. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.
16.
PhillipsE.OsosklyS.GroveJ.JentschJ (2011). From tools to teammates; Towards the development of appropriate mental models for intelligent robots. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 55(1), 1491-1495, doi:10.1177/1071181311551310
17.
ScerriP.Van BrackleD.RouffC.DickH.VallandinghamK. (2012). Freeform command and control of robotic platforms. American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
18.
SimsV.K.ChinM.G.SushilD.J.BarberD.J.BallionT.ClarkB.R.FinkelsteinN. (2010). Anthropomorphism of robotic forms: A response to affordances? In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 49(3), 602-605. doi: 10.1177/154193120504900383
19.
StoutR.J.Cannon-BowersJ.A.SalasE.MilanovichD. (1999). Planning, shred mental models, and coordinated performance: An empirical link is established. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 41(1), 61-71. doi: 10.1518/001872099779577273
20.
TorreyC.FussellS.R.KeislerS. (2013). How a robot should give advice. In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Human—Robot Interaction (HRI) (pp.275-282). Tokyo, Japan: IEEE.
WrightM. C.KaberD. B. (2005). Autorotation of information processing on teamwork Wright & Kaber 2005. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 47(1), 50-66. doi:10.1518/001872005365377
