The study of dynamic situations, in which the human operator can exert only partial control (such as in industrial process control, aircraft piloting, or air traffic control), has offered rare opportunities to examine the dynamics of cognitive control. Unlike most of the laboratory approaches to the study of cognition, this kind of study has stressed that several cognitive modes can act in parallel and that the distribution of control among the modes can evolve over time in relation to task requirements and human operator states. This article is a review of the arguments, developed in the literature on dynamic situations and by the authors themselves, in favor of a dynamic adjustment of cognitive control to situational features (integrating both the environment and the human) as a major component of adaptation. The main criterion used by the human operator to adjust cognitive control is situation mastery, as a guarantee that a satisficing performance will be reached with an acceptable quantity of resources. Two main dimensions are proposed to characterize cognitive control modes: the level of abstraction (symbolic/subsymbolic) and the origin (internal-anticipative, external-reactive) of the data used for control. Metacognition is considered as a means to distribute the cognitive control within these dimensions in order to ensure situation mastery. Theoretical, methodological, and practical implications of this perspective on cognitive control dynamics are drawn. From a theoretical viewpoint, the approach stresses the need to consider the cognitive system degrees of freedom to adapt to situations, and that therefore several solutions are possible in order to perform the same task. On the methodological side, the access to the diverse cognitive control modes, to their parallelism, and to the cognitive control dynamics requires new methodological approaches. The practical implications consist in developing support systems that keep the degrees of freedom open for adaptation and in trying to manage consistency.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AmalbertiR. (2001). La conduite de systèmes à risques [Controlling risky systems]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France. (First published 1996).
2.
AmalbertiR.ChampigneuxG. (1990). Man-machine coupling: The key for electronic copilot architecture. Paper presented at the NATO Conference: The human electronic crew: Is the team maturing? Ingolstadt, Germany.
3.
AmalbertiR.DeblonF. (1992). Cognitive modelling of fighter aircraft's control process: A step towards intelligent onboard assistance system. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 36, 639–671.
4.
AmalbertiR.VincentC.AuroyY.de SaintMaurice, G.(in press). Framework models of migrations and violations: A consumer guide. Quality and Safety in Healthcare.
5.
AndersonJ. (1985). Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: Freeman.
6.
AndersonJ. R.BothellD.ByrneM. D. (2004). An integrated theory of the mind. Psychological Review, 111, 1036–1060.
7.
BainbridgeL. (1978). The process controller. In SingletonW. T. (Ed.), The study of real skills, Vol. 1: The analysis of practical skills (pp. 236–263). St. Leonardgate, UK: MTP.
8.
BednyG. (2004). Activity theory [Special issue]. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 5(4).
9.
BerryD. C.BroadbentD. E. (1984). On the relationship between task performance and associated verbalizable knowledge. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 36A, 209–231.
10.
BerryD. C.BroadbentD. E. (1995). Implicit learning in the control of complex systems. In FrenschP.FunkeJ. (Eds.), Complex problem-solving: The European perspective (pp. 131–150). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11.
CellierJ. M.EyrolleH.MarinéC. (1997). Expertise in dynamic environments. Ergonomics, 40, 28–50.
12.
DamasioD. (1994). Descartes' error. New York: Avon Books.
13.
DörnerD. (1980). On the difficulties people have in dealing with difficulty. Simulation & Games, 11, 87–106.
14.
FalzonP. (1994). Les activités méta-fonctionnelles et leur assistance [Metafunctional activities and their assistance]. Le Travail Humain, 57, 1–23.
15.
Fernandez-DuqueD.JohnsonM. L. (1999). Attention metaphors: How metaphors guide the cognitive psychology of attention. Cognitive Science, 23, 83–116.
16.
FlavellJ.WellmanH. (1977). Metamemory. In KailJ.HagenC. (Eds.), Perpectives on the development of memory and cognition (pp. 3–34). New York: Wiley.
17.
FraserJ. M.SmithP. J.SmithJ. W.Jr. (1992). A catalog of errors. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 37, 265–307.
18.
GabaD. M. (1994). Human error in dynamic medical domains. In BognerM. S. (Ed.), Human error in medicine (pp. 197–224). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
19.
GibsonJ. (1979). The ecological approach to visual perception. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
20.
HelmreichR.KlinectJ. R.WilhelmJ. A.SextonJ. B. (2001, March). The Line Operations Safety Audit (LOSA). Paper presented at the first LOSA week. Cathay Pacific, Hong Kong.
21.
HirstW.SpelkeE.ReavesC.CaharackG.NeisserU. (1980). Dividing attention without alternation or automaticity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 98–117.
22.
HocJ. M. (1988). Cognitive psychology of planning. London: Academic Press.
23.
HocJ. M. (1989). Strategies in controlling a continuous process with long response latencies: Needs for computer support to diagnosis. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 30, 47–67.
24.
HocJ. M. (1996). Supervision et contrôle de processus: la cognition en situation dynamique [Process supervision and control: Cognition in dynamic situation]. Grenoble, France: Presses Universitaires de Grenoble.
25.
HocJ. M. (2001). Towards a cognitive approach to human-machine cooperation in dynamic situations. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54, 509–540.
26.
HocJ. M.AmalbertiR. (1995). Diagnosis and decision making, some theoretical questions raised by applied researches. Current Psychology of Cognition, 14, 73–101.
27.
HocJ. M.AmalbertiR.PleeG. (2000). Vitesse du processus et temps partagé, planification et concurrence attentionnelle [Process speed and time sharing, planning, and attentional concurrence]. L'Année Psychologique, 100, 629–660.
28.
HocJ. M.BlossevilleJ. M. (2003). Cooperation between drivers and in-car automatic driving assistance. In van der VeerG. C.HoornJ. F. (Eds.), Proceedings of CSAPC′03 (pp. 17–22). Rocquencourt, France: EACE.
29.
HocJ. M.DebernardS. (2002). Respective demands of task and function allocation on human-machine co-operation design: A psychological approach. Connection Science, 14, 283–295.
30.
HocJ. M.MoulinL. (1994). Rapidité du processus contrôlé et planification dans un micro-monde dynamique [Controlled-process speed and planning in a dynamic micro-world]. L'Année Psychologique, 94, 521–551.
31.
HollnagelE. (1993). Human reliability analysis: Context and control. London: Academic Press.
32.
HollnagelE. (2002). Time and time again. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3, 143–158.
HollnagelE.ManciniG.WoodsD. D. (Eds.) (1986). Intelligent decision support in process environments. Heidelberg, Germany: Springer-Verlag.
35.
HollnagelE.WoodsW.LevisonN. (2006). Resilience engineering: Concepts and precepts. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
36.
HoudéO.ZagoL.CrivelloF.MoutierS.PineauA.MazoyerB.Tzourio-MazoyerN. (2001). Access to deductive logic depends on a right ventromedial prefrontal area devoted to emotion and feeling: Evidence from a training paradigm. NeuroImage, 14, 1486–1492.
37.
KahnemanD. (1973). Attention and effort. Hillsdale, NJ: Prentice Hall.
KleinG. A.OrasanuJ.CalderwoodR.ZsambokC. E. (1993). Decision making in action: Models and methods. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
40.
LabergeD. (1973). Attention and the measurement of perceptual learning. Memory and Cognition, 1, 268–276.
41.
LandM. F.HorwoodJ. (1995). Which parts of the road guide steering? Nature, 377, 339–340.
42.
LazarusR. S. (1966). Psychological stress and the coping process. New York: McGraw-Hill.
43.
LoganG. (1988). Toward an instance theory of automatization. Psychological Review, 95, 492–527.
44.
LongJ. (1996). Specifying relations between research and the design of human-computer interaction. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 44, 875–920.
45.
LØvborgL.BrehmerB. (1991). NEWFIRE — A flexible system for running simulated fire-fighting experiments (Report No. RISØ-M-2953). Roskilde, Denmark: RISØ National Laboratory.
46.
MarcJ.AmalbertiR. (2002). Contribution de l'individu au fonctionnement sûr du collectif: L'exemple de la régulation du SAMU [Contribution of the individual to team safe operation]. Le Travail Humain, 64, 201–220.
47.
Milleville-PennelI.HocJ. M.JollyE.(in press). The use of hazard road signs to improve the perception of severe bends. Accident Analysis & Prevention.
48.
MorayN. (1986). Monitoring behavior and supervisory control. In Handbook of perception and human performance, Vol 2 (pp. 40.1–40.51). New York: Wiley.
49.
MorineauT.HocJ. M.DeneckerP. (2003). Cognitive control levels in air traffic radar controller activity. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 13, 107–130.
50.
NavonD. G. (1979). On the economy of the human processing system. Psychological Review, 86, 214–255.
51.
NoizetA.AmalbertiR. (2000). Le contrôle cognitif des activités routinières des agents de terrain en centrale nucléaire: Un double système de contrôle [Cognitive control of nuclear power plant field operators' routines]. Revue d'Intelligence Artificielle, 14, 107–129.
52.
NormanD. (1981). Categorization of action slips. Psychological Review, 88, 1–15.
53.
NormanD. (1988). The psychology of everyday things. New York: Basic Books.
54.
NormanD.BobrowG. (1975). On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 44–64.
55.
NormanD. A.ShalliceT. (1986). Attention to action: Willed and automatic control of behavior. In DavidsonG. S. R.ShapiroD. (Eds.), Consciousness and self-regulation (Vol. 4, pp. 1–18). New York: Plenum Press.
56.
NorrosL. (2005). The concept of habit in the analysis of situated actions. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 6, 385–407.
57.
O'HaraK.PayneS. (1999). Planning and the user interface: The effect of lockout time and error recovery cost. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 50, 41–59.
58.
PiagetJ. (1974a). La prise de conscience [Becoming aware]. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
59.
PiagetJ. (1974b). Adaptation vitale et psychologie de l'intelligence [Vital adaptation and psychology of intelligence]. Paris: Hermann.
60.
PitratJ. (Ed.) (1996). Reflection and meta-level AI architectures [Special issues]. Future Generation Computer Systems, 12 (2–3).
61.
PlatM.AmalbertiR. (2000). Experimental crew training to deal with automation surprises. In SarterN.AmalbertiR. (Eds.), Cognitive engineering in the aviation domain (pp. 287–308). Hillsdale: NJ: Erlbaum.
62.
RasmussenJ. (1986). Information processing and human-machine interaction. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
63.
RasmussenJ.RouseW. B. (Eds.) (1981). Human detection and diagnosis of system failures. New York: Plenum.
64.
RaufasteE.EyrolleH.MarinéC. (1998). Pertinence generation in radiological diagnosis: Spreading activation and the nature of expertise. Cognitive Science, 22, 517–546.
65.
ReasonJ. (1984). Absent-mindedness and cognitive control. In HarrisJ.MorrisP. (Eds.), Everyday memory actions & absent-mindedness (pp. 113–132). London: Academic Press.
66.
ReasonJ. (1990). Human error. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
67.
RichardJ. F. (1999). Object, limits and function of consciousness. Journal of Consciousness Studies, 6, 276–280.
68.
RizzoA.FerranteD.BagnaraS. (1995). Handling human error. In HocJ. M.CacciabueP. C.HollnagelE. (Eds.), Expertise and technology: Cognition & human-computer cooperation (pp. 195–212). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
69.
RothE. M. (1997). Analysis of decision-making in nuclear power plant emergencies: An investigation of aided decision-making. In ZsambokC. E.KleinG. (Eds.), Naturalistic decision-making (pp. 175–182). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
70.
RothE. M.WoodsD. D. (1988). Aiding human performance. I: Cognitive analysis. Le Travail Humain, 51, 39–64.
71.
SalasE.PrinceC.BakerD. P.ShresthaL. (1995). Situation awareness in team performance: Implications for measurement and training. Human Factors, 37, 123–136.
72.
SamurçayR.HocJ. M. (1996). Causal versus topographical support for diagnosis in a dynamic situation. Le Travail Humain, 59, 45–68.
73.
SandersonP. M. (1989). Verbalizable knowledge and skilled task performance: Association, dissociation, and mental models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition, 15, 729–747.
74.
SchneiderW.CheinJ. M. (2003). Controlled & automatic processing: Behavior, theory, and biological mechanisms. Cognitive Science, 27, 525–559.
75.
SchneiderW.ShiffrinR. M. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: Detection, search, and attention. Psychological Review, 84, 1–66.
76.
SheridanT. B. (1992). Telerobotics, automation, and human supervisory control. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
77.
ShiffrinR.SchneiderW. (1977). Controlled and automatic human information processing: Perceptual learning, automatic attending and a general theory. Psychological Review, 84, 127–190.
78.
SimonH. A. (1969). The science of the artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
79.
SpérandioJ. C. (1977). La régulation des modes opératoires en fonction de la charge de travail chez les contrôleurs de trafic aérien [Adaptation of the modes of operating to mental workload by air traffic controllers]. Le Travail Humain, 40, 249–256.
80.
StassenH. G.van LunterenT.SheridanT. B. (Eds.) (1997). Perspectives on the human controller: Essays in honor of Henk G. Stassen. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
81.
TrickL. M.EnnsJ. T.MillsJ.VavrikJ. (2004). Paying attention behind the wheel: A framework for studying the role of attention in driving. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 5, 385–424.
82.
ValotC. (2002). An ecological approach to metacognitive regulation in the adult. In ChambresM. I. P.MarescauxP. J. (Eds.), Metacognition: Process, function and use (pp. 201–221). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.
83.
ValotC.AmalbertiR. (1992). Metaknowledge for time and reliability. Reliability Engineering and Systems Safety, 36, 199–206.
84.
VicenteK. J. (1999). Cognitive work analysis. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
85.
VicenteK. J.MumawR. J.RothE. (2004). Operator monitoring in a complex dynamic work environment: A qualitative model based on field observations. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 5, 359–384.
86.
WertheimerM. (1959). Productive thinking: A gestalt view of problem solving and how to teach it. New York: Harper & Row.
87.
WickensC. D. (1984a). Engineering psychology and human performance. Columbus, GA: Merrill.
88.
WickensC. D. (1984b). Processing resources in attention. In ParasuramanR.DaviesR. (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 63–101). New York: Academic Press.
89.
WiolandL.AmalbertiR. (1996, November). When errors serve safety: Towards a model of ecological safety. Paper presented at the First Asian conference on Cognitive Systems Engineering in Process Control (CSEP 96), Kyoto, Japan.
90.
WoodsD.HollnagelE. (1987). Mapping cognitive demands in complex problem solving worlds. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 26, 257–275.
91.
WoodsDHollnagelE. (2006). Joint cognitive systems: Patterns in cognitive systems engineering. Boca Raton, FL: Taylor & Francis.
92.
XiaoY.MilgramP.DoyleD. J. (1997). Planning behavior and its functional role in interactions with complex systems. IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans, 27, 313–324.
