Transparent systems, opaque results: a study on automation compliance and task performance.

IF 3.4 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications Pub Date : 2025-02-21 DOI:10.1186/s41235-025-00619-4
Rebecca L Pharmer, Christopher D Wickens, Benjamin A Clegg
{"title":"Transparent systems, opaque results: a study on automation compliance and task performance.","authors":"Rebecca L Pharmer, Christopher D Wickens, Benjamin A Clegg","doi":"10.1186/s41235-025-00619-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In two experiments, we examine how features of an imperfect automated decision aid influence compliance with the aid in a simplified, simulated nautical collision avoidance task. Experiment 1 examined the impact of providing transparency in the pre-task instructions regarding which attributes of the task that the aid uses to provide its recommendations. Results showed that transparency here positively influenced compliance with the aid, leading to better task performance. Experiment 2 manipulated transparency via confidence estimates presented alongside the aid's recommendations. There were no benefits from this form of transparency. In Experiment 2, lower compliance with the aid's recommendations was found on more difficult collision problems, via a mediating loss of aid reliability and therefore trust. This runs contrary to the hypothesis that harder problems to solve ought to make participants more, rather than less dependent on the aid. Both experiments produced relatively low correlations between trust and compliance. The findings have important implications for the effectiveness of different kinds of transparency implementations, as well as providing a model/framework for understanding how generic factors such as automation reliability and problem difficulty influence both compliance and trust.</p>","PeriodicalId":46827,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","volume":"10 1","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11845646/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Research-Principles and Implications","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-025-00619-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In two experiments, we examine how features of an imperfect automated decision aid influence compliance with the aid in a simplified, simulated nautical collision avoidance task. Experiment 1 examined the impact of providing transparency in the pre-task instructions regarding which attributes of the task that the aid uses to provide its recommendations. Results showed that transparency here positively influenced compliance with the aid, leading to better task performance. Experiment 2 manipulated transparency via confidence estimates presented alongside the aid's recommendations. There were no benefits from this form of transparency. In Experiment 2, lower compliance with the aid's recommendations was found on more difficult collision problems, via a mediating loss of aid reliability and therefore trust. This runs contrary to the hypothesis that harder problems to solve ought to make participants more, rather than less dependent on the aid. Both experiments produced relatively low correlations between trust and compliance. The findings have important implications for the effectiveness of different kinds of transparency implementations, as well as providing a model/framework for understanding how generic factors such as automation reliability and problem difficulty influence both compliance and trust.

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
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
7.30%
发文量
96
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊最新文献
Beyond boundaries: a location-based toolkit for quantifying group dynamics in diverse contexts. Learning about causal relations that change over time: primacy and recency over long timeframes in causal judgments and memory. Learning the layout of different environments: common or dissociated abilities? Narrative visualizations: Depicting accumulating risks and increasing trust in data. Transparent systems, opaque results: a study on automation compliance and task performance.
×
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