New technology is flexible in the sense that it provides practitioners with a large number of functions and options for carrying out a given task under different circumstances. However, this flexibility has a price. Because the human supervisor must select the mode best suited to a particular situation, he or she must know more than before about system operations and the operation of the system as well as satisfy new monitoring and attentional demands to track which mode the automation is in and what it is doing to manage the underlying processes. When designers proliferate modes without supporting these new cognitive demands, new mode-related error forms and failure paths can result. Mode error has been discussed in human-computer interaction for some time; however, the increased capabilities and the high level of autonomy of new automated systems appear to have created new types of mode-related problems. We explore these new aspects based on results from our own and related studies of human-automation interaction. In particular, we draw on empirical data from a series of studies of pilot-automation interaction in commercial glass cockpit aircraft to illustrate the nature, circumstances, and potential consequences of mode awareness problems in supervisory control of automated resources. The result is an expanded view of mode error that takes into account the new demands imposed by more automated systems.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Adler, P. (1986). New technologies, new skills. California Management Review,29, 9–28.
2.
Bereiter, S., and Miller, S. M. (1988). Sources of difficulty in troubleshooting automated manufacturing systems. In W. Karwowski, H. Parsaei, and M. R. Willhelm, (Eds.), Ergonomics of hybrid automated systems.Amsterdam: Elsevier.
3.
Billings, C. E. (1991). Human-centered aircraft automation philosophy (NASA Tech. Memorandum 103885). Moffett Field, CA: NASA-Ames Research Center.
4.
Cook, R. I., Potter, S. S., Woods, D. D., and McDonald, J. M. (1991). Evaluating the human engineering of microprocessor-controlled operating room devices. Journal of Clinical Monitoring,7, 217–226.
5.
Endsley, M. R. (1988, May). Situation awareness global assessment technique (SAGAT). Presented at the National Aerospace and Electronic Conference, Dayton, OH.
6.
Eriksen, C. W., and Murphy, T. D. (1987). Movement of attentional focus across the visual field: A critical look at the evidence. Perception and Psychophysics,42, 299–305.
7.
Feltovich, P. J., Coulson, R. L., Spiro, R, J., and Dawson-Saunders, B. K. (in press). Knowledge application and transfer for complex tasks in ill-structured domains: Implications for instruction and testing in biomedicine. In D. Evans and V. Patel, (Eds.), Advanced models of cognition for medical training and practice.New York: Springer-Verlag.
8.
Gopher, D. (1991). The skill of attention control: Acquisition and execution of attention strategies. In D. Meyer and S. Kornblum, (Eds.), Attention and performance XIV.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9.
Jonides, J., and Yantis, S. (1988). Uniqueness of abrupt visual onset in capturing attention. Perception and Psychophysics,43, 346–354.
10.
Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
11.
Klein, G., and Crandall, B, (in press). The role of mental simulation in problem solving and decision making. In J. Flach, P. Hancock, J. Caird, and K. Vicente, (Eds.), The ecology of human-machine systems.Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12.
Lenorovitz, J. M. (1990). Indian A320 crash probe data show crew improperly configured the aircraft.Aviation Week & Space Technology,132(6/25/90), 84–85.
13.
Lewis, C., and Norman, D. A. (1986). Designing for error. In D. A. Norman and S, W. Draper, (Eds.), User-centered system design: New perspectives of human-computer interaction (pp. 411–432. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
14.
Ministere de I'Equipement, du Logement, des Transports et de I'Espace (1992, February). Rapport preliminaire relatif a l'accident survenu le 20 janvier 1992 pres du Mont Sainte-Odile (Bas-Rhin) a l'Airbus A320 de la Commission d'Enquete Administrative [Preliminary report of the Inquiry Commission on the Airbus A-320 accident near Mont Sainte-Odile on January 20, 1992]. Paris: Author.
15.
Moll van Charante, E., Cook, R. I., Woods, D. D., Yue, L., and Howie, M. B. (1992). Human-computer interaction in context: Physician interaction with automated intravenous controllers in the heart room, In Proceedings of the Fifth Symposium on Analysis, Design and Evaluation of Man-Machine Systems. The Hague, Netherlands.
16.
Monk, A. (1986). Mode errors: A user-centered analysis and some preventative measures using key-contingent sound. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies,24, 313–327.
17.
Norman, D. A. (1981). Categorization of action slips.. Psychological Review,88(1), 1–15.
18.
Norman, D. A. (1988). The psychology of everyday things.. New York: Basic Books.
19.
Norman, D. A. (1990). The "problem" of automation: Inappropriate feedback and interaction, not "over-automation.". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, B327, 585–593.
20.
Orasanu, J. M. (1990). Shared mental models and crew decision making (CSL Report 46). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University, Cognitive Science Laboratory.
21.
Sarter, N. B., and Woods, D. D. (1991). Situation awareness: A critical but ill-defined phenomenon. International Journal of Aviation Psychology,1, 45–57.
22.
Sarter, N, B., and Woods, D. D. (1992). Pilot interaction with cockpit automation: Operational experiences with the Flight Management System. International Journal of Aviation Psychology,2, 303–322.
23.
Sarter, N. B., and 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.
24.
Sellen, A. J., Kurtenbach, G. P., and Buxton, W. A. S. (1992). The prevention of mode errors through sensory feedback. Human-Computer Interaction,7, 141–164.
25.
Spiro, R. J., Vispoel, W., Schmitz, J., Samarapungavan, A., and Boerger, A, (1987). Knowledge acquisition for application: Cognitive flexibility and transfer in complex content domains. In B. C. Britton (Ed.), Executive control processes (pp. 177–199. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
26.
Tenney, Y. J., Jager Adams, M., Pew, R. W., Huggins, A. W. F., and Rogers, W. H. (1992). A principled approach to the measurement of situation awareness in commercial aviation (NASA Contractor Report NASI-18788). Hampton, VA: NASA Langley Research Center.
27.
Vidulich, M, A. (1992). Measuring situation awareness. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting (pp. 40–41). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
28.
Wiener, E. L. (1989). Human factors of advanced technology ("glass cockpit") transport aircraft (Tech. Report 177528). Moffett Field, CA: NASA Ames Research Center.
29.
Woods, D. D. (1992). The alarm problem and directed attention in dynamic fault management (Cognitive Systems Engineering Laboratory Report CSEL 92--TR-06). Columbus: Ohio State University.
30.
Woods, D. D. (1993). The price of flexibility in intelligent interfaces. Knowledge-Based Systems,6, 1–8.
31.
Woods, D. D., Johannesen, L. J., Cook, R. I., and Sarter, N. B. (1994, December). Behind human error: Cognitive systems, computers, and hindsight (CSERIAC State-of-the-Art Report 94–01). Dayton, OH: Crew Systems Ergonomic Information and Analysis Center.
32.
Woods, D. D., O'Brien, J, F., and Hanes, L. F. (1987). Human factors challenges in process control: The case of nuclear power plants. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors (pp. 1724–1770. New York: Wiley.
