We use the Situation awareness-based Agent Transparency model as a framework to design a user interface to support agent transparency. Participants were instructed to supervise an autonomous robotic agent as it traversed simulated urban environments. During this task, participants were exposed to one of three levels of information used to support agent transparency in the interface display. Our findings suggest that providing agent transparency information allows operators to properly calibrate trust without excess workload. Though, increased agent transparency information did not support operator situation awareness.
ChenJ.Y.C.BarnesM.J. (2014). Human-agent teaming for multi-robot control: A review of human factors issues. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems, 44(1), 13-29.
3.
ChenJ. Y.ProcciK.BoyceM.WrightJ.GarciaA.BarnesM. (2014). Situation Awareness-Based Agent Transparency (No. ARL-TR-6905). Aberdeen Proving Ground MD: US Army Research Laboratory.
4.
de VisserE. J.CohenM.FreedyA.ParasuramanR. (2014). A design methodology for trust cue calibration in cognitive agents. In Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality. Designing and Developing Virtual and Augmented Environments (pp. 251-262). Springer International Publishing.
5.
EndsleyM. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 37(1), 32-64.
6.
EndsleyM.R.BolteB.JonesD.G. (2003) Designing for situation awareness: an approach to human-centered design. London: Taylor and Francis.
7.
JianJ.Y.BisantzA.M.DruryC.G. (2000). Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4(1), 53-71.
8.
JonesD.G.KaberD.B. (2004). Situation awareness measurement and the situation awareness global assessment technique. In: StantonN.HedgeA.HendrickH.BrookhuisK.SalasE. (Eds.), Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics Methods. CRC Press, Boca Raton, USA, pp. 419–427.
9.
HelldinT.FalkmanG.RiveiroM.DavidssonS. (2013, October). Presenting system uncertainty in automotive UIs for supporting trust calibration in autonomous driving. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (pp. 210-217). ACM.
10.
KilgoreR.VoshellM. (2014). Increasing the transparency of unmanned systems: Applications of ecological interface design. In Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality. Applications of Virtual and Augmented Reality (pp. 378-389). Springer International Publishing.
11.
LeeJ. D.SeeK. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46(1), 50-80.
12.
MercadoJ.RuppM.ChenJ.BarnesM.BarberD.ProcciK. (in preparation). Intelligent agent transparency in human-agent teaming for multi-UxV management.
13.
MerrittS. M.IlgenD. R. (2008). Not all trust is created equal: Dispositional and history-based trust in human-automation interactions. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 50(2), 194-210.
14.
MillerC. A. (2014). Delegation and transparency: Coordinating interactions so information exchange is no surprise. In Virtual, Augmented and Mixed Reality. Designing and Developing Virtual and Augmented Environments (pp. 191-202). Springer International Publishing.
15.
OsoskyS.SandersT.JentschF.HancockP.ChenJ. Y. (2014, June). Determinants of system transparency and its influence on trust in and reliance on unmanned robotic systems. In SPIE Defense+ Security (pp. 90840E-90840E). International Society for Optics and Photonics.
16.
ParasuramanR.SheridanT. B.WickensC. D. (2000). A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans, IEEE Transactions on, 30(3), 286-297.
17.
SalmonP. M.StantonN. A.WalkerG. H.JenkinsD.LadvaD.RaffertyL.YoungM. (2009). Measuring Situation Awareness in complex systems: Comparison of measures study. InternationalJournal of Industrial Ergonomics, 39(3), 490-500.
18.
WangL.JamiesonG. A.HollandsJ. G. (2011, September). The effects of design features on users’ trust in and reliance on a combat identification system. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 375-379). SAGE Publications.
