未能掌握自动化失败

IF 2.2 Q3 ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making Pub Date : 2023-07-22 DOI:10.1177/15553434231189375
G. Skraaning, G. Jamieson
{"title":"未能掌握自动化失败","authors":"G. Skraaning, G. Jamieson","doi":"10.1177/15553434231189375","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Automation failure is a key construct in human-automation interaction research. Yet the paucity of exposition on this construct has led to confusion about what sorts of failures are suitable for testing predictions of human performance in response to automation failure. We illustrate here how overly narrow or broad definitions of automation failure limit the explanatory power of human performance models in a way that is not obviously reasoned. We then review three aviation safety events that challenge the overly narrow definition. Reflecting on those events and other observations, we propose an initial taxonomy of automation failure and other automation-related human performance challenges. We conclude by pointing out the utility of the taxonomy for advancing human-automation interaction research.","PeriodicalId":46342,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Failure to Grasp Automation Failure\",\"authors\":\"G. Skraaning, G. Jamieson\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/15553434231189375\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Automation failure is a key construct in human-automation interaction research. Yet the paucity of exposition on this construct has led to confusion about what sorts of failures are suitable for testing predictions of human performance in response to automation failure. We illustrate here how overly narrow or broad definitions of automation failure limit the explanatory power of human performance models in a way that is not obviously reasoned. We then review three aviation safety events that challenge the overly narrow definition. Reflecting on those events and other observations, we propose an initial taxonomy of automation failure and other automation-related human performance challenges. We conclude by pointing out the utility of the taxonomy for advancing human-automation interaction research.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46342,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/15553434231189375\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/15553434231189375","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, INDUSTRIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自动化故障是人类自动化交互研究中的一个关键问题。然而,由于缺乏对这一结构的阐述,人们对什么样的故障适合于测试人类在应对自动化故障时的表现预测感到困惑。我们在这里说明了自动化故障的过于狭窄或宽泛的定义如何以一种没有明显推理的方式限制了人类绩效模型的解释力。然后,我们回顾了三起航空安全事件,它们挑战了过于狭隘的定义。考虑到这些事件和其他观察结果,我们提出了自动化故障和其他自动化相关人员绩效挑战的初步分类。最后,我们指出了分类法对推进人类自动化交互研究的实用性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Failure to Grasp Automation Failure
Automation failure is a key construct in human-automation interaction research. Yet the paucity of exposition on this construct has led to confusion about what sorts of failures are suitable for testing predictions of human performance in response to automation failure. We illustrate here how overly narrow or broad definitions of automation failure limit the explanatory power of human performance models in a way that is not obviously reasoned. We then review three aviation safety events that challenge the overly narrow definition. Reflecting on those events and other observations, we propose an initial taxonomy of automation failure and other automation-related human performance challenges. We conclude by pointing out the utility of the taxonomy for advancing human-automation interaction research.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
10.00%
发文量
21
期刊最新文献
Introduction to the Special Issue on Automation Failure Augmenting Human Cognition With a Digital Submarine Periscope Get on the Round Dial: Fighter Pilot Strategies for Recovering Situation Awareness After Disorienting Physiological Events Distinguishing Urgent From Non-urgent Communications: A Mixed Methods Study of Communication Technology Use in Perinatal Care Wrong, Strong, and Silent: What Happens when Automated Systems With High Autonomy and High Authority Misbehave?
×
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