Sheridan's “Levels of Automation” were explored in an experiment on fault management of a continuous process control task which included situation adaptive automation. Levels of automation with more or less automation autonomy, and different levels of advice to the operator were compared, with automatic diagnosis whose reliability varied. The efficiency of process control and of fault management were explored under human control and automation in fault management, and aspects of the task in which human or automation were the more efficient defined. The results are related to earlier work on trust and self confidence in allocation of function by Lee, Moray, and Muir.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
InagakiT.1993. Situation adaptive degree of automation for system safety. Proc. IEEE Int. Workshop on Robot and Human Communication.231–236.
2.
InagakiT.1995. Situation adaptive responsibility allocation for human-centered automation. Trans. SICE of Japan, 31(3), 292–298.
3.
LeeJ. D.MorayN. (1992) Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems. Ergonomics, 35, 1243–1270.
4.
LeeJ. D.MorayN. (1994) Trust, self confidence and operators' adaptation to automation. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies.40, 153–184.
5.
MuirB. M.MorayN.1996. Trust in automati* II. Experimental studies of trust and intervention in a process control sim* Ergonomics, 39(3). 429–461.
6.
SheridanT. B.1987. Supervisory control. In SalvendyG.. Handbook of Human Factors. New York: Wiley.
7.
SheridanT. B.VerplankW. L.1978. Human and computer control of undersea teleoperators. technical report, Man-Machine Systems Laboratory, Department of mechanical Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge. Mass.
