Trust in Automation Measures for Aeromedical Settings.

IF 0.9 4区 医学 Q4 BIOPHYSICS Aerospace medicine and human performance Pub Date : 2024-11-01 DOI:10.3357/AMHP.6465.2024
Bethany Ranes, Jordayne Wilkins, Emily Kenser, Marissa Caid-Loos
{"title":"Trust in Automation Measures for Aeromedical Settings.","authors":"Bethany Ranes, Jordayne Wilkins, Emily Kenser, Marissa Caid-Loos","doi":"10.3357/AMHP.6465.2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>As military environments integrate more complex technological systems, operators increasingly require more assistance from automation. When used properly, automation can significantly enhance performance; however, proper use is predicated on the operator's trust in the automation (TIA). TIA, like trust among people, is influenced by biological, psychosocial, and behavioral aspects. While options for measuring TIA have rapidly expanded in the past decade, there has been little consideration for how well these measures perform in operational environments.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A 10-yr literature review was conducted to identify TIA measures and rate their appropriateness for operational aeromedical environments. Articles from Google Scholar, EBSCO, and the Defense Technical Information Center databases were included, focusing on user-reported, physiological, and behavioral measures. Study quality was rated by aeromedical research scientists, while aeromedical appropriateness was evaluated by rated military pilots. Measures were categorized as High Recommendation, Cautious Recommendation, or Not Recommended based on these evaluations.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the measures reviewed, 28 were recommended for operational use, 23 received cautious recommendations, and 6 were not recommended. The recommended measures demonstrated high research quality and suitability for aeromedical environments. The cautious recommendations highlighted measures with specific limitations that need to be considered in operational settings, while the not recommended measures lacked sufficient evidence for reliable use in these contexts.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Several high-quality TIA measures appear suitable for operational aeromedical settings. While these recommendations offer a starting point for testing TIA in aeromedical settings, further research is required to test how well these measures perform in an operational environment. Ranes B, Wilkins J, Kenser E, Caid-Loos M. Trust in automation measures for aeromedical settings. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2024; 95(11):851-861.</p>","PeriodicalId":7463,"journal":{"name":"Aerospace medicine and human performance","volume":"95 11","pages":"851-861"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aerospace medicine and human performance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3357/AMHP.6465.2024","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"BIOPHYSICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: As military environments integrate more complex technological systems, operators increasingly require more assistance from automation. When used properly, automation can significantly enhance performance; however, proper use is predicated on the operator's trust in the automation (TIA). TIA, like trust among people, is influenced by biological, psychosocial, and behavioral aspects. While options for measuring TIA have rapidly expanded in the past decade, there has been little consideration for how well these measures perform in operational environments.

Methods: A 10-yr literature review was conducted to identify TIA measures and rate their appropriateness for operational aeromedical environments. Articles from Google Scholar, EBSCO, and the Defense Technical Information Center databases were included, focusing on user-reported, physiological, and behavioral measures. Study quality was rated by aeromedical research scientists, while aeromedical appropriateness was evaluated by rated military pilots. Measures were categorized as High Recommendation, Cautious Recommendation, or Not Recommended based on these evaluations.

Results: Of the measures reviewed, 28 were recommended for operational use, 23 received cautious recommendations, and 6 were not recommended. The recommended measures demonstrated high research quality and suitability for aeromedical environments. The cautious recommendations highlighted measures with specific limitations that need to be considered in operational settings, while the not recommended measures lacked sufficient evidence for reliable use in these contexts.

Discussion: Several high-quality TIA measures appear suitable for operational aeromedical settings. While these recommendations offer a starting point for testing TIA in aeromedical settings, further research is required to test how well these measures perform in an operational environment. Ranes B, Wilkins J, Kenser E, Caid-Loos M. Trust in automation measures for aeromedical settings. Aerosp Med Hum Perform. 2024; 95(11):851-861.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对航空医疗环境自动化措施的信任。
导言:随着军事环境集成越来越复杂的技术系统,操作员越来越需要自动化的更多帮助。如果使用得当,自动化可以显著提高性能;然而,正确的使用是基于操作员对自动化(TIA)的信任。TIA和人与人之间的信任一样,受到生物、社会心理和行为方面的影响。在过去的十年中,测量TIA的方法迅速扩展,但很少有人考虑这些方法在操作环境中的表现。方法:对10年的文献进行回顾,以确定TIA措施并评估其在操作航空医学环境中的适用性。来自b谷歌Scholar、EBSCO和国防技术信息中心数据库的文章被包括在内,重点关注用户报告的、生理的和行为的测量。研究质量由航空医学研究科学家评定,而航空医学适宜性由合格的军事飞行员评定。根据这些评估,这些措施被分为高度推荐、谨慎推荐和不推荐。结果:在审查的措施中,推荐操作使用的措施28项,谨慎使用的措施23项,不推荐使用的措施6项。建议的措施显示了高研究质量和航空医学环境的适用性。谨慎的建议强调了在业务环境中需要考虑的具有具体限制的措施,而未建议的措施缺乏在这些情况下可靠使用的充分证据。讨论:一些高质量的TIA措施似乎适用于操作航空医学环境。虽然这些建议为在航空医学环境中测试TIA提供了一个起点,但还需要进一步的研究来测试这些措施在操作环境中的表现。李建军,张建军,张建军,等。航空医疗系统自动化的研究进展。航空航天Med Hum执行。2024;95(11): 851 - 861。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Aerospace medicine and human performance
Aerospace medicine and human performance PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
22.20%
发文量
272
期刊介绍: The peer-reviewed monthly journal, Aerospace Medicine and Human Performance (AMHP), formerly Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, provides contact with physicians, life scientists, bioengineers, and medical specialists working in both basic medical research and in its clinical applications. It is the most used and cited journal in its field. It is distributed to more than 80 nations.
期刊最新文献
Building a Stronger AsMA - Best Practices for Committee Chairs, Deputies, and Members. Cochlear Implants in Aviators. Enlarged Foramen Ovale-Caused Meningeal Bulge in a Pilot. Actigraphy-Driven Biomathematical Fatigue Modeling in British Military Rotary-Wing Pilots. High-Altitude Acute Hypoxia Endurance and Comprehensive Lung Function in Pilots.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1