A General Model of Mixed-Initiative Human-Machine Systems
Abstract
The increasing role of automation in human-machine systems requires modelling approaches which are flexible enough to systematically express a large range of automation levels and assist the exploration of a large range of automation issues. A General Model of Mixed-Initiative Human-Machine Systems is described, along with a corresponding automation taxonomy, which: provides a framework for representing human-machine systems over a wide range of complexity; forms the basis of a dynamic, pseudo-mathematical simulation of complex interrelationships between situational and cognitive factors operating in dynamic function allocation decisions; and can guide methodical investigations into the implications of decisions regarding system automation levels.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Within each type of automation, automation can be applied across a continuum of levels from low to high, from fully manual to fully automatic.
“Within each of these types, automation can be applied across a continuum of levels from low to high, i.e., from fully manual to fully automatic.”
From A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation (2000) · cites this paper as [12]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse
Parasuraman, R., & Riley, V. (1997) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872097778543886 · Cited by 4,554 · see citing works
Self-citationA model for types and levels of human interaction with automation
Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T. B., & Wickens, C. D. (2000) · IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans · doi:10.1109/3468.844354 · Cited by 4,195 · see citing works
Performance Consequences of Automation-Induced 'Complacency'
Parasuraman, R., Molloy, R., & Singh, I. L. (1993) · The International Journal of Aviation Psychology · doi:10.1207/s15327108ijap0301_1 · Cited by 875 · see citing works
Vagia, M., Transeth, A. A., & Fjerdingen, S. A. (2016) · Applied Ergonomics · doi:10.1016/j.apergo.2015.09.013 · Cited by 299 · see citing works
- Authors
- Riley, V.
- Affiliations
- Honeywell Systems and Research Center Minneapolis, MN
- Corresponding author
- Riley, Victor
- Venue
- Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1989-10
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 124-128
- ISSN
- 0163-5182 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2147392138
- Cited by
- 153
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 14 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 4.44
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Ergonomics and Human Factors
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
- Keywords
- levels of automation, function allocation, situational factors, cognitive factors, human-machine interaction
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review