Abstract:This paper extends previous research on two approaches to human-centred automation: (1) intermediate levels of automation (LOAs) for maintaining operator involvement in complex systems control and facilitating situation awareness; and (2) adaptive automation (AA) for managing operator workload through dynamic control allocations between the human and machine over time. Some empirical research has been conducted to examine LOA and AA independently, with the objective of detailing a theory of human-centred automation. Unfortunately, no previous work has studied the interaction of these two approaches, nor has any research attempted to systematically determine which LOAs should be used in adaptive systems and how certain types of dynamic function allocations should be scheduled over time. The present research briefly reviews the theory of human-centred automation and LOA and AA approaches. Building on this background, an initial study was presented that attempts to address the conjuncture of these two approaches to human-centred automation. An experiment was conducted in which a dual-task scenario was used to assess the performance, SA and workload effects of low, intermediate and high LOAs, which were dynamically allocated (as part of an AA strategy) during manual system control for various cycle times comprising 20, 40 and 60% of task time. The LOA and automation allocation cycle time (AACT) combinations were compared to completely manual control and fully automated control of a dynamic control task performed in conjunction with an embedded secondary monitoring task. Results revealed LOA to be the driving factor in determining primary task performance and SA. Low-level automation produced superior performance and intermediate LOAs facilitated higher SA, but this was not associated with improved performance or reduced workload. The AACT was the driving factor in perceptions of primary task workload and secondary task performance. When a greater percentage of primary task time was automated, operator perceptual resources were freed-up and monitoring performance on the secondary task improved. Longer automation cycle times than have previously been studied may have benefits for overall human–machine system performance. The combined effect of LOA and AA on all measures did not appear to be ‘additive’ in nature. That is, the LOA producing the best performance (low level automation) did not do so at the AACT, which produced superior performance (maximum cycle time). In general, the results are supportive of intermediate LOAs and AA as approaches to human-centred automation, but each appears to provide different benefits to human–machine system performance. This work provides additional information for a developing theory of human-centred automation.

Automation Type and Reliability Impact on Visual Automation Monitoring and Human Performance

Detecting automation failures in a simulated supervisory control environment

Near-Perfect Automation: Investigating Performance, Trust, and Visual Attention Allocation

Toward Quantifying Trust Dynamics: How People Adjust Their Trust After Moment-to-Moment Interaction With Automation

Performance and Relative Risk Dynamics During Driving Simulation Tasks under Distinct Automation Conditions

Validation of Trade-Off in Human–Automation Interaction: An Empirical Study of Contrasting Office Automation Effects on Task Performance and Workload

Automation function and malfunction: effects on human performance in accident handling tasks

The effects of level of automation and adaptive automation on human performance, situation awareness and workload in a dynamic control task

Automation Expectation Mismatch: Incorrect Prediction Despite Eyes on Threat and Hands on Wheel

Dynamics of Trust in Automation and Interactive Decision Making During Driving Simulation Tasks

Transparency improves the accuracy of automation use, but automation confidence information does not

Reliable but multi-dimensional cognitive demand in operating partially automated vehicles: implications for real-world automation research

Automation transparency: implications of uncertainty communication for human-automation interaction and interfaces

Impacts of Automation Reliability and Failure Modes on Operators’ Performance in Security Screening

Not All Information Is Equal: Effects of Disclosing Different Types of Likelihood Information on Trust, Compliance and Reliance, and Task Performance in Human-Automation Teaming

Humans and Automation: Use, Misuse, Disuse, Abuse

Inferring Trust From Users' Behaviours; Agents' Predictability Positively Affects Trust, Task Performance and Cognitive Load in Human-Agent Real-Time Collaboration

Human Trust-based Feedback Control: Dynamically varying automation transparency to optimize human-machine interactions

Research Considerations and Tools for Evaluating Human-Automation Interaction with Future Unmanned Systems

Driver Vigilance in Automated Vehicles: Effects of Demands on Hazard Detection Performance

Adaptable (Not Adaptive) Automation: Forefront of Human–Automation Teaming