The Effect of Incorrect Reliability Information on Expectations, Perceptions, and Use of Automation

Laura H. Barg‐Walkow · Wendy A. Rogers

46 citations0/0 files storedHuman Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Human-Automation Interaction and Safety Usability and User Interface Design Social Robot Interaction and HRI

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: We examined how providing artificially high or low statements about automation reliability affected expectations, perceptions, and use of automation over time. BACKGROUND: One common method of introducing automation is providing explicit statements about the automation's capabilities. Research is needed to understand how expectations from such introductions affect perceptions and use of automation. METHOD: Explicit-statement introductions were manipulated to set higher-than (90%), same-as (75%), or lower-than (60%) levels of expectations in a dual-task scenario with 75% reliable automation. Two experiments were conducted to assess expectations, perceptions, compliance, reliance, and task performance over (a) 2 days and (b) 4 days. RESULTS: The baseline assessments showed initial expectations of automation reliability matched introduced levels of expectation. For the duration of each experiment, the lower-than groups' perceptions were lower than the actual automation reliability. However, the higher-than groups' perceptions were no different from actual automation reliability after Day 1 in either study. There were few differences between groups for automation use, which generally stayed the same or increased with experience using the system. CONCLUSION: Introductory statements describing artificially low automation reliability have a long-lasting impact on perceptions about automation performance. Statements including incorrect automation reliability do not appear to affect use of automation. APPLICATION: Introductions should be designed according to desired outcomes for expectations, perceptions, and use of the automation. Low expectations have long-lasting effects.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 46 citations exist upstream.

References

2004Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance 1997Humans and Automation: Use, Misuse, Disuse, Abuse 2000A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation 1968Pygmalion in the classroom 2001Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III 2006Factors predicting the use of technology: Findings from the center for research and education on aging and technology enhancement (create).1992Trust, control strategies and allocation of function in human-machine systems 1996Are humans good intuitive statisticians after all? Rethinking some conclusions from the literature on judgment under uncertainty

Cited by

2018Vigilance and Automation Dependence in Operation of Multiple Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS): A Simulation Study 2016Influence of lane departure warnings onset and reliability on car drivers' behaviors

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.