Automation bias and errors: are crews better than individuals?

Int J Aviat Psychol. 2000;10(1):85-97. doi: 10.1207/S15327108IJAP1001_5.

Abstract

The availability of automated decision aids can sometimes feed into the general human tendency to travel the road of least cognitive effort. Is this tendency toward "automation bias" (the use of automation as a heuristic replacement for vigilant information seeking and processing) ameliorated when more than one decision maker is monitoring system events? This study examined automation bias in two-person crews versus solo performers under varying instruction conditions. Training that focused on automation bias and associated errors successfully reduced commission, but not omission, errors. Teams and solo performers were equally likely to fail to respond to system irregularities or events when automated devices failed to indicate them, and to incorrectly follow automated directives when the contradicted other system information.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

MeSH terms

  • Aerospace Medicine
  • Attention*
  • Automation*
  • Aviation*
  • Awareness
  • Decision Making
  • Humans
  • Social Facilitation*
  • Task Performance and Analysis*