In this article, we propose the application of a control-theoretic framework to human-automation interaction. The framework consists of a set of conceptual distinctions that should be respected in automation research and design. We demonstrate how existing automation interface designs in some nuclear plants fail to recognize these distinctions. We further show the value of the approach by applying it to modes of automation. The design guidelines that have been proposed in the automation literature are evaluated from the perspective of the framework. This comparison shows that the framework reveals insights that are frequently overlooked in this literature. A new set of design guidelines is introduced that builds upon the contributions of previous research and draws complementary insights from the control-theoretic framework. The result is a coherent and systematic approach to the design of human-automation-plant interfaces that will yield more concrete design criteria and a broader set of design tools. Applications of this research include improving the effectiveness of human-automation interaction design and the relevance of human-automation interaction research.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ashby, R. W. (1956). An introduction to cybernetics.London: Chapman and Hall.
2.
Automated cockpits special report, Part I. (1995a). Aviation Week and Space Technology, 142(5), 52–65.
3.
Automated cockpits special report, Part II. (1995b). Aviation Week and Space Technology, 142(6), 48–57.
4.
Bainbridge, L. (1981). Mathematical equations or processing routines? In J. Rasmussen, & W. B. Rouse (Eds.), Human detection and diagnosis of system failures (pp. 259–286). New York: Plenum.
5.
Bennett, K. B., & Flach, J. M. (1992). Graphical displays: Implications for divided attention, focused attention, and problem solving. Human Factors, 34, 513–533.
6.
Besnard, D., Greathead, D., & Baxter, G. (2004). When mental models go wrong: Co-occurrences in dynamic, critical systems. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 60, 117–128.
7.
Billings, C. E. (1997). Aviation automation: The search for a human-centered approach.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
8.
Conant, R. C., & Ashby, W. R. (1970). Every good regulator of a system must be a model of that system. International Journal of Systems Science, 2, 89–97.
9.
Cook, R. I., Potter, S. S., Woods, D. D., & McDonald, J. S. (1991). Evaluating the human engineering of microprocessor-controlled operating room devices. Journal of Clinical Monitoring, 7, 217–226.
10.
Degani, A. (1996). Modeling human-machine systems: On modes, error, and patterns of interaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta.
Degani, A., & Heymann, M. (2002). Formal verification of human-automation interaction. Human Factors, 44, 28–43.
13.
Degani, A., & Kirlik, A. (1995). Modes in human-automation interaction: Initial observations about a modeling approach. In Proceedings of the 1995 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (pp. 3443–3450). Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers.
14.
Degani, A., Shafto, M., & Kirlik, A. (1999). Modes in human-machine systems: Review, classification, and application. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 9, 125–138.
15.
Frank, P. M. (1990). Fault diagnosis in dynamic systems using analytical and knowledge-based redundancy - A survey and some new results. Automatica, 26, 459–474.
16.
Hirschhorn, L. (1984). Beyond mechanization: Work and technology in a postindustrial age.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17.
Holder, B., & Hutchins, E. (2001). What pilots learn about auto-flight while flying on the line. In Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (n.p.). Columbus: Ohio State University.
18.
Jamieson, G. A., & Guerlain, S. (2000). Operator interaction with model-based predictive controllers in petrochemical refining. In Proceedings of the Human Performance, Situation Awareness and Automation Conference (pp. 172–177). Marietta, GA: SA Technologies.
19.
Lee, J. D., & Sanquist, T. F. (1996). Maritime automation. In R. Parasuraman, & M. Mouloua (Eds.), Automation and human performance: Theory and applications (pp. 365–384). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
20.
Leveson, N. G., & Palmer, E. (1997). Designing automation to reduce operator errors. In Proceedings of the 1997 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (pp. 1144–1150). Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers.
21.
Leveson, N. G., Pinnel, L. D., Sandays, S. D., Koga, S., & Reese, J. D. (1997). Analyzing software specifications for mode confusion potential. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Human Error and Systems Development (pp. 132–147). Glasgow, Scotland: University of Glasgow.
22.
Moray, N. (1986). Monitoring behavior and supervisory control. In K. R. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance (Vol. 2, 40.1–40.51). New York: Wiley.
23.
Mouloua, M., & Parasuraman, R. (Eds.). (1994). Human performance in automated systems: Current research and trends.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
24.
Mumaw, R. J., Roth, E. M., Vicente, K. J., & Burns, C. M. (2000). There is more to monitoring a nuclear power plant than meets the eye. Human Factors, 42, 36–55.
25.
Nikolic, M. I., & Sarter, N. B. (2001). Peripheral visual feedback: A powerful means of supporting effective attention allocation in event-driven, data-rich environments. Human Factors, 43, 30–38.
26.
Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things.New York: Basic.
27.
Norman, D. A. (1990). The "problem" with automation: Inappropriate feedback and interaction, not "over-automation". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London (B), 327, 585–593.
28.
Oishi, M., Tomlin, C., & Degani, A. (2003). Discrete abstractions of hybrid systems: Verification of safety and application to user-interface design (NASA/TM-2003--212803). Moffett Field, CA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Ames Research Center.
29.
Palmer, M. T., & Abbot, K. H. (1994). Effects of expected-value information and display format on recognition of aircraft sub-system abnormalities (NASA Tech. Report No. 3395). Hampton, VA: National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Langley Research Center.
30.
Parasuraman, R., Molloy, R., Mouloua, R., & Hilburn, B. (1996). Monitoring of automated systems. In R. Parasuraman, & M. Mouloua (Eds.), Automation and human performance: Theory and applications (pp. 3–17). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
31.
Parasuraman, R., & Mouloua, M. (Eds.). (1996). Automation and human performance: Theory and applications.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
32.
Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, and abuse. Human Factors, 39, 230–253.
33.
Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T. B., & Wickens, C. D. (2000). A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 30, 286–297.
34.
Rasmussen, J. (1976). Outlines of a hybrid model of the process plant operator. In T. B. Sheridan, & G. Johannsen (Eds.), Monitoring behavior and supervisory control (pp. 371–383). New York: Plenum.
35.
Rasmussen, J. (1985). The role of hierarchical knowledge representation in decision making and system management. IEEE Transactions of Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, SMC-15, 234–243.
36.
Rasmussen, J. (1986). Information processing and human-machine interaction: An approach to cognitive engineering.Amsterdam: North-Holland.
37.
Rasmussen, J., & Goodstein, L. P. (1987). Decision support in supervisory control of high-risk industrial systems. Automatica, 23, 663–671.
38.
Rasmussen, J., Pejtersen, A. M., & Goodstein, L. P. (1994). Cognitive systems engineering.New York: Wiley.
39.
Riley, V. (1996). What avionics engineers should know about pilots and automation. In Proceedings of the 14th AIAA/IEEE Digital Avionics Systems Conference (pp. 252–257). Piscataway, NJ: Institute of Electrical & Electronics Engineers.
40.
Riley, V. (2001). A new language for pilot interfaces. Ergonomics in Design, 9(2), 21–26.
41.
Rouse, W. B. (1980). Systems engineering models of human-machine interaction.New York: Elsevier.
42.
Sarter, N. B. (1995). "Knowing when to look where": Attention allocation on advanced automated flight decks. In R. S. Jensen (Ed.), Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (pp. 239–242). Columbus: Ohio State University.
43.
Sarter, N. B., & Woods, D. D. (1992a). Mode error in supervisory control of automated systems. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting (pp. 26–29). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
44.
Sarter, N. B., & Woods, D. D. (1992b). Pilot interaction with cockpit automation: Operational experiences with the flight management system. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 2, 303--321.
45.
Sarter, N. B., & Woods, D. D. (1994). Pilot interaction with cockpit automation: II. An experimental study of pilots' model and awareness of the flight management system. International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 4, 1–28.
46.
Sarter, N. B., & Woods, D. D. (1995a). Autonomy, authority, and observability: Properties of advanced automation and their impact on human-machine coordination. In Proceedings of the 6th IFAC/IFIP/IFORS/IEA Symposium on Analysis, Design, and Evaluation of Man-Machine Systems (pp. 181–184). Cambridge, MA: International Federation of Automated Control.
47.
Sarter, N. B., & Woods, D. D. (1995b). How in the world did we ever get into that mode? Mode error and awareness in supervisory control. Human Factors, 37, 5–19.
48.
Sarter, N. B., & Woods, D. D. (1997). Team play with a powerful and independent agent: Operational experiences and automation surprises on the Airbus A-320. Human Factors, 39, 553–569.
49.
Sheridan, T. B. (1987). Supervisory control. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors (pp. 1243–1268). New York: Wiley.
50.
Sheridan, T. B. (2002). Humans and automation: Systems design and research issues.New York: Wiley.
51.
Sheridan, T. B., & Ferrell, W. R. (1974). Man-machine systems: Information, control, and decision models of human performance.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
52.
Sklar, A. E., & Sarter, N. B. (1999). Good vibrations: Tactile feed-back in support of attention allocation and human-automation coordination in event-driven domains. Human Factors, 41, 543–552.
53.
Vakil, S. S., & Hansman, R. J. (2002). Approaches to mitigating complexity-driven issues in commercial autoflight systems. Reliability Engineering and System Safety, 75, 133–145.
54.
Vakil, S. S., Hansman, R. J., Midkiff, A. H., & Vaneck, T. (1995). Feedback mechanisms to improve mode awareness in advanced autoflight systems. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (pp. 243–248). Columbus: Ohio State University.
55.
Vicente, K. J. (1999). Cognitive work analysis: Toward safe, productive, and healthy computer-based work.Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
56.
Vicente, K. J., Christoffersen, K., & Hunter, C. N. (1996). Response to Maddox critique. Human Factors, 38, 546–549.
57.
Vicente, K. J., Mumaw, R. J., & Roth, E. M. (2004). Operator monitoring in a complex dynamic work environment: A qualitative cognitive model based on field observations. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 5, 359–384.
58.
Vicente, K. J., & Rasmussen, J. (1990). The ecology of human-machine systems: II. Mediating "direct perception" in complex work domains. Ecological Psychology, 2, 207–250.
59.
Vicente, K. J., & Rasmussen, J. (1992). Ecological interface design: Theoretical foundations. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 22, 589–606.
60.
Vicente, K. J., Roth, E. M., & Mumaw, R. J. (2001). How do operators monitor a complex, dynamic work domain? The impact of control room technology. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 54, 831–856.
61.
Wade, H. L. (1994). Regulatory and advanced regulatory control.Research Triangle Park, NC: Instrument Society of America.
62.
Wickens, C. D., Mavor, A. S., Parasuraman, R., & McGee, J. P. (Eds.). (1998). The future of air traffic control: Human operators and automation.Washington, DC: National Academy.
63.
Wiener, E. L. (1985). Beyond the sterile cockpit. Human Factors, 27, 75–90.
64.
Wiener, E. L., & Curry, R. E. (1980). Flight-deck automation: Promises and problems. Ergonomics, 23, 995–1011.
65.
Woods, D. D. (1991). The cognitive engineering of problem representations. In J. Alty, & G. Weir (Eds.), Human-computer interaction in complex systems (pp. 169–188). London: Academic.
66.
Woods, D. D. (1996). Decomposing automation: Apparent simplicity, real complexity. In R. Parasuraman, & M. Mouloua (Eds.), Automation and human performance: Theory and applications (pp. 3–17). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
67.
Woods, D. D., Patterson, E. S., Roth, E. M., & Christoffersen, K. (1999). Can we ever escape from data overload? A cognitive systems diagnosis. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 43rd Annual Meeting (pp. 174–178). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
