A Quantitative Measure for Degree of Automation and Its Relation to System Performance and Mental Load

Abstract

In this paper we quantitatively model degree of automation (DofA) in supervisory control as a function of the number and nature of tasks to be performed by the operator and automation. This model uses a task weighting scheme in which weighting factors are obtained from task demand load, task mental load and using an experimental system. Based on controlled experiments using operators, analyses of the task effect on system performance, the prediction and assessment of task demand load, and the prediction of mental load were performed. Each experiment had a different DofA. The effect of a change in DofA on system performance and mental load was investigated. It was found that system performance became less sensitive to changes in DofA at higher levels of DofA. The experimental data showed that when the operator controlled a partly automated system, perceived mental load could be predicted from the task mental load for each task component, as calculated by analyzing a situation in which all tasks were manually controlled. Actual or potential applications of this research include a methodology to balance and optimize the automation of complex industrial systems.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

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

Bi, S. , & Salvendy, G. (1994). Analytical modeling and experimental study of human workload in scheduling of advanced manufacturing systems. International Journal of Human Factors in Manufacturing, 4, 205–234.

Billings, C. E. (1991). Human-centered aircraft automation: A concept and guidelines (NASA Tech. Memorandum 103885). Moffett Field, CA: NASA Ames Research Center.

Endestad, T. (1991). The Halden Reactor Project workshop on guidelines for design and evaluation of computerized systems for the man-machine interface (HWR-282). Halden, Norway: Institutt for Energiteknikk, OECD Halden Reactor Project.

Endsley, M. R. , & Kiris, E. O. (1995). The out-of the-loop performance problem and level of control in automation. Human Factors, 37, 381–384.

Fitts, P. M. (1951). Human engineering for an effective air navigation and traffic control system. Washington, DC: National Research Council.

Gluckman, J. P. , Morrison, J. G. , & Deaton, J. E. (1991). Complex task performance as a basis for developing cognitive engineering guidelines in adaptive automation. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 35th Annual Meeting (pp. 116–120). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

Hill, S. G. , Plamondon, B. D. , & Wierwille, W. W. (1987). Analytic techniques for the assessment of operator workload. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting (pp. 368–372). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

Hollnagel, E. (1995). Automation design: Methodological aspects of HCA. Lecture note at the 1995 Industrial Summer School on Human Centered Automation, organized by EURISCO, August 21-25, St.-Lary, France.

10.

Johannsen, G. , Levis, A. H. , & Stassen, H. G. (1994). Theoretical problems in man-machine systems and their experimental validation. Automatica, 30, 217–231.

11.

Kantowitz, B. H. , & Sorkin, R. D. (1987). Allocation of functions. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors (pp. 355–368). New York: Wiley.

12.

Levis, A. H. , Moray, N. , & Hu, B. S. (1994). Task decomposition and allocation problems and discrete event systems. Automatica, 30, 203–216.

13.

Liu, Y. , & Wickens, C. D. (1987). The effect of processing code, response modality and task difficulty on dual task performance and subjective workload in a manual system. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting (pp. 847–851). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

14.

National Instruments Corp. (1993). LabVIEW for Windows - User manual. Austin, TX: Author.

15.

Price, H. E. (1985). The allocation of functions in systems. Human Factors, 27, 33–45.

16.

Rouse, W. B. , Cody, W. J. , & Frey, P. R. (1992). Lessons learned in developing human-machine system design tools. Information and Decision Technologies, 18, 301–308.

17.

Salvendy, G. , & Bi, S. (1994). A proposed methodology for prediction of human workload based on engineering system parameters. Work and Stress, 8, 355–371.

18.

Sheridan, T. B. (1992). Telerobotics, automation and human supervisory control. Cambridge: MIT Press.

19.

Stassen, H. G. , Andriessen, J. H. M. , & Wieringa, P. A. (1993). On the human perception of complex industrial processes. In Preprints of the 12th IFAC World Control Congress (Vol. 6, pp. 275–280). Oxford, England: Elsevier Science.

20.

Stassen, H. G. , Johannsen, G. , & Moray, N. (1990). Internal representation, internal model, human performance model and mental workload. Automatica, 26, 811–820.

21.

Veldt, R. J. van der. (1984). Looking ahead supervisory control. In Proceedings of the 4th European Annual Conference on Human Decision Making and Manual Control (pp. 249–262). Soesterberg, Netherlands: TNO Institute for Perception.

22.

Veltman, J. A. , & Gaillard, A. W. K. (1993). Measurement of pilot workload with subjective and physiological techniques. In Proceedings of Workload Assessment and Aviation Safety (pp. 3.1–3.13). London: Royal Aeronautical Society.

23.

Vidulich, M. A. , & Tsang, P. S. (1987). Absolute magnitude estimation and relative judgment approaches to subjective workload assessment. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 31st Annual Meeting (pp. 1057–1061). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

24.

Wierwille, W. W. , & Eggemeier, F. T. (1993). Recommendations for mental workload measurement in a test and evaluation environment. Human Factors, 35, 263–281.

25.

Zijlstra, F. R. H. (1993). Efficiency in work behavior. Delft, Netherlands: Delft University Press.