The Effect of a Priori Probability and Complexity on Decision Making in a Supervisory Control Task

Abstract

In the present study we investigated how monitoring and fault management in a ship control task are affected by complexity and a priori probability of disturbances. Participants were required to supervise four independent shipping subsystems and to adjust the subsystems whenever deviations occurred. However, in order to apply the correct action, they first had to diagnose the cause of the deviation by requesting further subsystem information. Complexity and a priori probability were manipulated by varying the number of disturbances occurring simultaneously and the disturbance rates over subsystems. In general, the results indicate that the participants ignored the monitoring function when they were diagnosing a disturbance. Results also show evidence for “cognitive lockup”: Despite the possibility of stabilizing additional system faults and, consequently, increasing their time for diagnosis, participants tended not to interrupt an ongoing fault-finding process. Still, large individual differences were found in both the selected strategy and reasoning abilities.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bainbridge, L. (1983). Ironies of automation. Automatica, 19, 775–779.

Brehmer, B. (1992). Dynamic decision making: Human control of complex systems. Acta Psychologica, 81, 211–241.

Edland, A. , & Svenson, O. (1993). Judgment and decision making under time pressure: Studies and findings. In O. Svenson and A. J. Maule , Time pressure and stress in human judgment and decision making (pp. 27–40). New York: Plenum.

Hederström, H. , & Gyldén, S. (1992). Safer navigation in the 90s-Integrated bridge systems. Journal of Navigation, 45, 369–383.

Hawkins, F. H. (1993). Human factors in flight.. Aldershot, England: Ashgate.

Kerstholt, J. H. (1994). The effect of time pressure on decision-making behaviour in a dynamic task environment. Acta Psychologica, 86, 89–104.

Kerstholt, J. H. , Passenier, P.O. , & Schuffel, H. (1994). The effect of a priori probability and complexity on decision making in ship operation (Report TNOTM 1994 C-22). Soesterberg, Netherlands: TNO Human Factors Research Institute.

Moray, N. (1986). Monitoring behaviour and supervisory control. In K. R. Boff , L. Kaufman , and J. P. Thomas , Handbook of perception and performance (Vol. 2, pp. 40–1–40–51). New York: Wiley.

Moray, N. , & Rotenberg, I. (1989). Fault management in process control: Eye movements and action. Ergonomics. 32, 1319–1342.

10.

Reason, J. (1990). Human error.. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

11.

Senders, J. (1964). The human operator as a monitor and controller of multidegree of freedom systems. IEEE Transactions on Human Factors in Electronics, HFE-5, 2–6.

12.

Sheridan, T. B. (1988). Task allocation and supervisory control. In M. Helander , (Ed.), Handbook of human-computer interaction (pp. 159–173. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

13.

Sterman, J. D. (1989). Misperceptions of feedback in dynamic decision making. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 43, 301–335.

14.

Wagenaar, W. A. , & Groencweg, J. (1987). Accidents at sea: Multiple causes and impossible consequences. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 27, 587–598.

15.

Wickens, C. D. (1992). Engineering psychology and human performance. (2nd ed.) New York: HarperCollins.

16.

Wiener, E. L. (1985). Beyond the sterile cockpit. Human Factors, 27, 75–90.