A Decision Model for Cognitive Task Allocation

Abstract

Cognitive task allocation employs task analysis to identify the performance and operational requirements of task functions; and demand/resource matching to match the identified requirements and the human and computer resources available for implementation.

The current methodologies of cognitive task allocation are either too aggregate to provide adequate resolution of performance requirements or domain-specific and thus of limited applicability. The paper introduces a formal, quantitative, and domain-independent model of cognitive task allocation aimed at reducing the limitations inherent in the currently practiced methodologies.

Demand/resource matching is modeled as an Analytic Hierarchy Process. The Analytic Hierarchy Process of Demand/Resource Matching is defined as a mapping process along a four-level Analytic Hierarchy. By means of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, a task function (Level 1 of the Analytic Hierarchy) is analyzed into its cognitive processes (Level 2); performance criteria are set for each cognitive process (Level 3) by means of which the capacities of the human, computer, or interactive human/computer controller (Level 4) are evaluated and compared. The Analytic Hierarchy Process then integrates judgements of human and computer abilities and limitations into a weighted average indicating the relative capacity of human and computer to perform this function. This assessment of relative merit of performance can hence be integrated with work design, economic, and other contextual factors towards the final allocation design.

The Analytic Hierarchy Process was applied and evaluated in the design of task allocation in production planing and control of a flexible manufacturing system by comparing the allocation designs of two groups of subjects. One group was supported by the decision model, the other received no decision support. The observed differences between the two groups indicated that the decision model can effectively support detailed task analysis and an adequate resolution of performance requirements; the identification of the design, trade-offs between human allocation and automation; and provide the computational resources to reduce decision bias.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Clegg

Ravden

Corbett

Johnson

(1989). Allocating functions in computer integrated manufacturing: A review and a new method. Behavior and Information Technology, 8 (3), 175–190.

Eberts

Salvendy

(1986). The contribution of cognitive engineering to the safe design and operation of CAM and robotics. Journal of Occupational Accidents, 8, 49–67. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier.

Papantonopoulos

S.A.

(1990). A decision model for cognitive task allocation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.

Rasmussen

(1986). Information processing and human-machine interaction. New York: Elsevier.

Saaty

T.L.

(1980). The analytic hierarchy process. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Sharit

Chang

T.-C.

Salvendy

(1987). Technical and human aspects of computer-aided manufacturing. In Salvendy

(Ed.) Handbook of human factors (pp. 1694–1723). New York: Wiley.

Sheridan

T.B.

(1987). Supervisory control. In Salvendy

(Ed.) Handbook of human factors (pp. 1243–1268). New York: Wiley.

Simon

H.A.

(1960). The new science of management decision. New York: Harper & Brothers.

Stammers

R.B.

Carey

M.S.

Astlet

J.A.

(1990). Task analysis. In Wilson

J.R.

Corlett

E.N.

(Eds.), Evaluation of human work (pp. 134–160). London: Taylor and Francis.