In this article I describe the origins of the stages and levels of the automation concept and present the taxonomy, model, and theories underlying this concept. I then show how both simplifications and elaborations of the resulting tradeoff model of degree of automation can address some of Kaber’s concerns about its utility in design.
BroadbentD. E. (1958). Perception and communications. New York, NY: Permagon.
2.
BroadbentD. E. (1971). Decision and stress. New York, NY: Academic Press.
3.
EndsleyM. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37, 32–64.
4.
EndsleyM. R.KirisE. O. (1995). The out-of-the-loop performance problem and level of control in automation. Human Factors, 37, 381–394.
5.
FerrisT.SarterN.WickensC. (2010). Cockpit automation: Still struggling to keep up. In SalasE.MaurinoD. (Eds.), Human factors in automation (2nd ed., pp. 479–504). Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Elsivier.
6.
FittsP.PosnerM. (1967). Human performance. Belmont, CA: Brooks Cole.
7.
GargA. X.AdhikariN. K.McDonaldH.Rosas-ArellanoM. P.DevereauxP. J.BeyeneJ.SamJ.HaynesR. B. (2005). Effect of computerized decision support systems on practitioner performance and patient outcome. Journal of the American Medical Association, 293, 1223–1238.
8.
JamiesonG.SkraaningG. (2018). Levels of automation: Why we might consider throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 12, 42–49.
9.
KaberD. (2018). Issues in human–automation interaction modeling: Presumptive aspects of frameworks of types and levels of automation. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 12, 7–24.
10.
KaberD. B.EndsleyM. (2004). The effects of level of automation and adaptive automation on human performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 5, 113–153.
11.
MercadoJ.RuppM.ChenJ.BarnesM.BarberD.ProcciK. (2016). Intelligent agent transparency in human-agent teaming for multi-UxV management. Human Factors, 58, 401–415.
12.
MorayN.InagakiT. (2000). Attention and complacency. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 1, 354–365.
13.
MorrowD. G.WickensC. D.NorthR. (2006). Reducing and mitigating human error in medicine. In NickersonR. S. (Ed.), Annual review of human factors and ergonomics (Vol. 1, pp. 254–296). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
14.
OnnaschL.WickensC.LiH.ManzeyD. (2014). Human performance consequences of stages and levels of automation: An integrated meta-analysis. Human Factors, 56(3), 476–488.
15.
ParasuramanR. (1987). Human-computer monitoring. Human Factors, 29, 695–706.
16.
ParasuramanR.MolloyR.SinghI. L. (1993). Performance consequences of automation induced “complacency.”International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3, 1–23.
17.
ParasuramanR.SheridanT. B.WickensC. D. (2000). A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, & Cybernetics: Part A: Systems and Humans, 30(3), 286–297.
18.
PutnamA.SungkhasetteeV.RoedigerH. (2016). Optimizing learning in college: Tips from cognitive psychology. Psychological Science, 11, 652–660.
19.
SarterN. B. (2008). Investigating mode errors on automated flight decks: Illustrating the problem-driven, cumulative, and interdisciplinary nature of human factors research. Human Factors, 50, 506–510.
20.
SauerJ.RuttingerB. (2007) Automation and decision support in interactive consumer products. Ergonomics, 50, 902–919.
21.
SebokA.WickensC. D. (2017). Implementing lumberjacks and black swans into model-based tools to support human-automation interaction. Human Factors, 59, 189–202.
22.
SendersJ. W. (1983). Visual sampling processes. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
23.
SeongY.BisantzA. (2008). The impact of cognitive feedback on judgment performance and trust with decision aids. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 38, 608–635.
24.
SheridanT. B. (1970). On how often a supervisor should sample. IEEE Transactions in Systems Science & Cybernetics, 6, 140–145.
25.
SheridanT. B.VerplankW. L. (1978). Human and computer control of undersea teleoperators (Technical report). Cambridge, MA: MIT, Man Machine Systems Laboratory.
26.
SlameckaN. J.GrafP. (1978). The generation effect: Delineation of a phenomenon. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 4, 592–604.
27.
TrapsilawatiF.WickensC. F.ChenH.XuX. (2017). Transparency and conflict resolution automation reliability in air traffic control. In TsangP.VidulichM.FlachJ. (Eds.), Proceedings International Symposium on Aviation Psychology. Dayton, OH: Wright State University.
28.
WandkeH. (2005). Assistance in human-machine interaction: A conceptual framework and a proposal for a taxonomy. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 6(2), 129–155.
29.
WickensC. (1984). Engineering psychology & human performance (1st ed.). Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.
30.
WickensC.McCarleyJ. (2017). Commonsense statistics in aviation safety research. In VidulichM.TsangP.FlachJ. (Eds.), Advances in aviation psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 74–86). Averbury, VT: Ashgate.
31.
WickensC. D.MavorA. S.ParasuramanR.McGeeJ. P. (Eds.). (1998). The future of air traffic control: Human operators and automation. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
32.
WickensC. D.SebokA.LiH.GacyA.SarterN. (2015). Using modeling and simulation to predict operator performance and automation-induced complacency with robotic automation: A case study and empirical validation. Human Factors, 57, 959–975.
