The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effects of Automation of Information-Processing Functions on Teamwork
Abstract
We investigated the effects of automation as applied to different stages of information processing on team performance in a complex decision-making task. Forty teams of 2 individuals performed a simulated Theater Defense Task. Four automation conditions were simulated with computer assistance applied to realistic combinations of information acquisition, information analysis, and decision selection functions across two levels of task difficulty. Multiple measures of team effectiveness and team coordination were used. Results indicated different forms of automation have different effects on teamwork. Compared with a baseline condition, an increase in automation of information acquisition led to an increase in the ratio of information transferred to information requested; an increase in automation of information analysis resulted in higher team coordination ratings; and automation of decision selection led to better team effectiveness under low levels of task difficulty but at the cost of higher workload. The results support the use of early and intermediate forms of automation related to acquisition and analysis of information in the design of team tasks. Decision-making automation may provide benefits in more limited contexts. Applications of this research include the design and evaluation of automation in team environments.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
In the citing paper
“(I) Higher levels of agent autonomy generally have positive effects (e.g., participant attitudes, workload, and performance), although a moderate level was ideal in a few studies.”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Wright and Kaber (2005)
In the citing paper
“Team coordination was measured through behavioral observations and communication recordings during the task (e.g., Cooke et al., 2016; Demir, Cooke, et al., 2018; Demir, Likens, et al. 2018; Demir, McNeese, et al. 2018; Gorman et al., 2019; Wright & Kaber, 2005).”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Wright & Kaber, 2005
In the citing paper
“(II) Higher task difficulty led to negative outcomes such as higher workload and lower performance.”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Wright and Kaber (2005)
In the citing paper
“coordination was stronger (Wright & Kaber, 2005)”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Wright & Kaber, 2005
In the citing paper
“task difficulty was associated with lower performance, higher task switching frequency, and higher workload (Fan et al., 2010; Wright & Kaber, 2005).”
From Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature (2022) · cites this paper as Wright & Kaber, 2005
4 more claims about this paper
Create a free account to see every claim other papers make about this one.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research
(1988) · Advances in Psychology · doi:10.1016/s0166-4115(08)62386-9 · Cited by 15,003
A 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 · cited 7×
“…would include an investigation of the main effects and interactions of automation manipulations along each of the four information-processing functions identified by Parasuraman et al. (2000) and for each of the team members, together and in isolation, as recommended by Jentsch and Bowers (1996).”
BackgroundMethodInfluentialMeasurement of Situation Awareness in Dynamic Systems
Endsley, M. R. (1995) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1518/001872095779049499 · Cited by 2,039
ENDSLEY, M. R., & KABER, D. B. (1999) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/001401399185595 · Cited by 1,088
Self-citationBainbridge, L. (1983) · Analysis, Design and Evaluation of Man–Machine Systems · doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-029348-6.50026-9 · Cited by 219
Research works printed but not linked: 42
- Bainbridge, L., 1987, New technology and human error, 271
- Bolstad, C. A. & Endsley, M.R. (1999). Shared mental models and shared displays: An empirical evaluation of team performance. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 43rd Annual Meeting (pp. 213-217). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · DOI
- Bolstad, C. A. & Endsley, M. R. (2000). The effect of task load and shared displays on team situation awareness. In Proceedings of the XIVth Triennial Congress of the International Ergonomics Association and 44th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp. 1.189–1.192). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · DOI
- Bowers, C. A., Deaton, J., Oser, R., Prince C. & Kolb, M. (1993). The impact of automation on crew communication and performance. In Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (pp. 758–761). Columbus: Ohio State University.
- Bowers, C. A., Jentsch, F. & Salas, E. (1994). Studying automation in the lab - Can you? Should you? In N. McDonald, N. Johnston, & R. Fuller (Eds.), Applications of psychology to aviation systems (Vol. 3, pp. 281–286). Avebury, UK: Ashgate.
- 10.1207/s15327876mp0502_2 · DOI
- Bowers, C. A., 1996, Automation and human performance: Theory and applications, 243
- 10.1518/001872095779049372 · DOI
- 10.1207/s15327043hup0604_1 · DOI
- Clamann, M. P., Wright, M. C. & Kaber, D. B. (2002). Comparison of performance effects of adaptive automation applied to various stages of human-machine system information processing. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting (pp. 342–346). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · DOI
- Clothier, C. (1991). Behavioral interactions across various aircraft types: Results of systematic observations of line operations and simulations. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (pp. 332–337). Columbus: Ohio State University.
- Cooke, N., Kiekel, P. A. & Bell, B. (2002). Addressing limitations in the measurement of team cognition. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting (pp. 403–407). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · doi:10.1177/154193120204600340
- Costley, J., Johnson, D. & Lawson, D. (1989). A comparison of cockpit communication B737-B757. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (pp. 413-418). Columbus: Ohio State University.
- Coury, B. G., 1996, Automation and human performance: Theory and applications, 201
- Dickinson, T. L., 1997, Team performance assessment and measurement: Theory, methods and applications, 19
- Endsley, M. R. (1997). Level of automation: Integrating humans and automated systems. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41st Annual Meeting (pp. 200–204). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · DOI
- 10.1518/001872095779064555 · DOI · Paper page
- Foushee, H. C., 1986, Crew factors in flight operations III: The operational significance of exposure to short-haul air transport operations
- Galster, S. M., Bolia, R. S. & Parasuraman, R. (2002). Effects of information automation and decision-aiding cuing on action implementation in a visual search task. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting (pp. 438–442). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · DOI
- Jentsch, F. & Bowers, C. (1996). Automation and crew performance: The importance of who and what. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 40th Annual Meeting (pp. 49–53). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · DOI
- Jentsch, F., Sellin-Wolters, S., Bowers, C. A. & Salas, E. (1995). Crew coordination behaviors as predictors of problem detection and decision making times. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 39th Annual Meeting (pp. 1350–1353). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · doi:10.1177/154193129503902024
- Johannesen, L. J., Cook, R. I. & Woods, D. D. (1994). Cooperative communications in dynamic fault management. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 38th Annual Meeting (pp. 225–229). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · DOI
- Kaber, D. B. & Endsley, M. R. (1997). The combined effect of level of automation and adaptive automation on human performance with complex, dynamic control systems. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41st Annual Meeting (pp. 205–209). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · DOI
- 10.1002/1520-6564(200023)10:4<409::AID-HFM4>3.0.CO;2-V · doi:10.1002/1520-6564(200023)10:4<409::aid-hfm4>3.0.co;2-v
- 10.1207/s15327566ijce0303_1 · DOI
- Kaber, D. B., 2002, Human response to adaptive automation of early sensory/information acquisition functions and later stages of information processing in complex system operations
- Laois, L. & Giannacourou, M. (1995). Perceived effects of advanced ATC functions on human activities: Results of a survey on controllers and experts. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Symposium on Aviation Psychology (pp. 392–397). Columbus: Ohio State University.
- MacMillan, J., Entin, E. & Serfaty, D. (2002). From team structure to team performance: A framework. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting (pp. 408–412). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · doi:10.1177/154193120204600341
- Orasanu, J. M., 1990, Shared mental models and crew decision making
- Rovira, E., Zinni, M. & Parasuraman, R. (2002). Effects of information and decision automation on multi-task performance. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting (pp. 327–331). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · DOI
- Ruff, H., 2000, Human performance, situation awareness and automation: User-centered design for the new millennium, 70
- 10.1518/001872001775870403 · DOI · Paper page
- Scerbo, M. W., 1996, Automation and human performance: Theory and applications, 37
- 10.1037/10278-008 · DOI
- 10.21236/ADA057655 · DOI · Paper page
- Travillian, K. K., Volpe, C. E., Cannon-Bowers, J. A. & Salas, E. (1993). Cross-training highly interdependent teams: Effects on team processes and team performance. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 37th Annual Meeting (pp. 1243–1247). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society. · doi:10.1177/154193129303701809
- 10.21236/ADA275894 · doi:10.21236/ada275894
- 10.1518/001872096778940741 · DOI · Paper page
- Wickens, C. D., 1998, The future of air traffic control: Human operators and automation.
- Wiener, E. L., 1993, Cockpit resource management, 199
- Wise, J. A., 1992, Human factors in aviation safety: The effects of automation on corporate pilots
- Woods, D. D., 1996, Automation and human performance: Theory and applications, 3
Cited by
Human–Autonomy Teaming: A Review and Analysis of the Empirical Literature
O’Neill, T., McNeese, N., Barron, A., & Schelble, B. (2022) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720820960865 · Cited by 695
Human Performance Consequences of Stages and Levels of Automation: An Integrated Meta-Analysis
Onnasch, L., Wickens, C. D., Li, H., & Manzey, D. (2014) · Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society · doi:10.1177/0018720813501549 · Cited by 524
Metadata
- Authors
- Wright, M. C., & Kaber, D. B.
- Affiliations
- Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina
- University of Rostock, Rostock-Warnemünde, Germany
- Venue
- Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-03
- Volume
- 47
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 50-66
- ISSN
- 0018-7208
- 1547-8181
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 5
- Language
- en
- Licence
- journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
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
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
