Trust in Automation: The Effects of System Certainty on Decision-Making

Author(s):  
Maya S. Luster ◽  
Brandon J. Pitts

In the field of Human Factors, the concept of trust in automation can help to explain how and why users interact with particular systems. One way to examine trust is through task performance and/or behavioral observations. Previous work has identified several system-related moderators of trust in automation, such as reliability and complexity. However, the effects of system certainty, i.e., the knowledge that a machine has regarding its own decision-making abilities, on trust remains unclear. The goal of this study was to examine the extent to which system certainty affects perceived trust. Participants performed a partially simulated flight task and decided what action to take in response to targets in the environment detected by the aircraft’s automation. The automation’s certainty levels in recognizing targets were 30%, 50%, and 80%. Overall, participants accepted the system’s recommendation regardless of the certainty level and trust in the system increased as the system’s certainty level increased. Results may help to inform the development of future autonomous systems.

Author(s):  
Ruikun Luo ◽  
Na Du ◽  
Kevin Y. Huang ◽  
X. Jessie Yang

Human-autonomy teaming is a major emphasis in the ongoing transformation of future work space wherein human agents and autonomous agents are expected to work as a team. While the increasing complexity in algorithms empowers autonomous systems, one major concern arises from the human factors perspective: Human agents have difficulty deciphering autonomy-generated solutions and increasingly perceive autonomy as a mysterious black box. The lack of transparency could lead to the lack of trust in autonomy and sub-optimal team performance (Chen and Barnes, 2014; Endsley, 2017; Lyons and Havig, 2014; de Visser et al., 2018; Yang et al., 2017). In response to this concern, researchers have investigated ways to enhance autonomy transparency. Existing human factors research on autonomy transparency has largely concentrated on conveying automation reliability or likelihood/(un)certainty information (Beller et al., 2013; McGuirl and Sarter, 2006; Wang et al., 2009; Neyedli et al., 2011). Providing explanations of automation’s behaviors is another way to increase transparency, which leads to higher performance and trust (Dzindolet et al., 2003; Mercado et al., 2016). Specifically, in the context of automated vehicles, studies have showed that informing the drivers of the reasons for the action of automated vehicles decreased drivers’ anxiety, increased their sense of control, preference and acceptance (Koo et al., 2014, 2016; Forster et al., 2017). However, the studies mentioned above largely focused on conveying simple likelihood information or used hand-drafted explanations, with only few exceptions (e.g.(Mercado et al., 2016)). Further research is needed to examine potential design structures of transparency autonomy. In the present study, we wish to propose an option-centric explanation approach, inspired by the research on design rationale. Design rationale is an area of design science focusing on the “representation for explicitly documenting the reasoning and argumentation that make sense of a specific artifact (MacLean et al., 1991)”. The theoretical underpinning for design rationale is that for designers what is important is not just the specific artifact itself but its other possibilities – why an artifact is designed in a particular way compared to how it might otherwise be. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of the option-centric explanation approach on trust, dependence and team performance. We conducted a human-in-the-loop experiment with 34 participants (Age: Mean = 23.7 years, SD = 2.88 years). We developed a simulated game Treasure Hunter, where participants and an intelligent assistant worked together to uncover a map for treasures. The intelligent assistant’s ability, intent and decision-making rationale was conveyed in the option-centric rationale display. The experiment used a between-subject design with an independent variable – whether the option-centric rationale explanation was provided. The participants were randomly assigned to either of the two explanation conditions. Participants’ trust to the intelligent assistant, confidence of accomplishing the experiment without the intelligent assistant, and workload for the whole session were collected, as well as their scores for each map. The results showed that by conveying the intelligent assistant’s ability, intent and decision-making rationale in the option-centric rationale display, participants had higher task performance. With the display of all the options, participants had a better understanding and overview of the system. Therefore, they could utilize the intelligent assistant more appropriately and earned a higher score. It is notable that every participant only played 10 maps during the whole session. The advantages of option-centric rationale display might be more apparent if more rounds are played in the experiment session. Although not significant at the .05 level, there seems to be a trend suggesting lower levels of workload when the rationale explanation displayed. Our study contributes to the study of human-autonomy teaming by considering the important role of explanation display. It can help human operators build appropriate trust and improve the human-autonomy team performance.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Debbie Marianne Yee ◽  
Sarah L Adams ◽  
Asad Beck ◽  
Todd Samuel Braver

Motivational incentives play an influential role in value-based decision-making and cognitive control. A compelling hypothesis in the literature suggests that the brain integrates the motivational value of diverse incentives (e.g., motivational integration) into a common currency value signal that influences decision-making and behavior. To investigate whether motivational integration processes change during healthy aging, we tested older (N=44) and younger (N=54) adults in an innovative incentive integration task paradigm that establishes dissociable and additive effects of liquid (e.g., juice, neutral, saltwater) and monetary incentives on cognitive task performance. The results reveal that motivational incentives improve cognitive task performance in both older and younger adults, providing novel evidence demonstrating that age-related cognitive control deficits can be ameliorated with sufficient incentive motivation. Additional analyses revealed clear age-related differences in motivational integration. Younger adult task performance was modulated by both monetary and liquid incentives, whereas monetary reward effects were more gradual in older adults and more strongly impacted by trial-by-trial performance feedback. A surprising discovery was that older adults shifted attention from liquid valence toward monetary reward throughout task performance, but younger adults shifted attention from monetary reward toward integrating both monetary reward and liquid valence by the end of the task, suggesting differential strategic utilization of incentives. Together these data suggest that older adults may have impairments in incentive integration, and employ different motivational strategies to improve cognitive task performance. The findings suggest potential candidate neural mechanisms that may serve as the locus of age-related change, providing targets for future cognitive neuroscience investigations.


Author(s):  
Mirette Dubé ◽  
Jason Laberge ◽  
Elaine Sigalet ◽  
Jonas Shultz ◽  
Christine Vis ◽  
...  

Purpose: The aim of this article is to provide a case study example of the preopening phase of an interventional trauma operating room (ITOR) using systems-focused simulation and human factor evaluations for healthcare environment commissioning. Background: Systems-focused simulation, underpinned by human factors science, is increasingly being used as a quality improvement tool to test and evaluate healthcare spaces with the stakeholders that use them. Purposeful real-to-life simulated events are rehearsed to allow healthcare teams opportunity to identify what is working well and what needs improvement within the work system such as tasks, environments, and processes that support the delivery of healthcare services. This project highlights salient evaluation objectives and methods used within the clinical commissioning phase of one of the first ITORs in Canada. Methods: A multistaged evaluation project to support clinical commissioning was facilitated engaging 24 stakeholder groups. Key evaluation objectives highlighted include the evaluation of two transport routes, switching of operating room (OR) tabletops, the use of the C-arm, and timely access to lead in the OR. Multiple evaluation methods were used including observation, debriefing, time-based metrics, distance wheel metrics, equipment adjustment counts, and other transport route considerations. Results: The evaluation resulted in several types of data that allowed for informed decision making for the most effective, efficient, and safest transport route for an exsanguinating trauma patient and healthcare team; improved efficiencies in use of the C-arm, significantly reduced the time to access lead; and uncovered a new process for switching OR tabletop due to safety threats identified.


2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alicia M. Zavala ◽  
Gary E. Day ◽  
David Plummer ◽  
Anita Bamford-Wade

Objective This paper provides a narrative overview of the literature concerning clinical decision-making processes when staff come under pressure, particularly in uncertain, dynamic and emergency situations. Methods Studies between 1980 and 2015 were analysed using a six-phase thematic analysis framework to achieve an in-depth understanding of the complex origins of medical errors that occur when people and systems are under pressure and how work pressure affects clinical performance and patient outcomes. Literature searches were conducted using a Summons Search Service platform; search criteria included a variety of methodologies, resulting in the identification of 95 papers relevant to the present review. Results Six themes emerged in the present narrative review using thematic analysis: organisational systems, workload, time pressure, teamwork, individual human factors and case complexity. This analysis highlights that clinical outcomes in emergency situations are the result of a variety of interconnecting factors. These factors may affect the ability of clinical staff in emergency situations to provide quality, safe care in a timely manner. Conclusions The challenge for researchers is to build the body of knowledge concerning the safe management of patients, particularly where clinicians are working under pressure. This understanding is important for developing pathways that optimise clinical decision making in uncertain and dynamic environments. What is known about the topic? Emergency departments (EDs) are characterised by high complexity, high throughput and greater uncertainty compared with routine hospital wards or out-patient situations, and the ED is therefore prone to unpredictable workflows and non-replicable conditions when presented with unique and complex cases. What does this paper add? Clinical decision making can be affected by pressures with complex origins, including organisational systems, workload, time constraints, teamwork, human factors and case complexity. Interactions between these factors at different levels of the decision-making process can increase the complexity of problems and the resulting decisions to be made. What are the implications for practitioners? The findings of the present study provide further evidence that consideration of medical errors should be seen primarily from a ‘whole-of-system’ perspective rather than as being primarily the responsibility of individuals. Although there are strategies in place in healthcare organisations to eliminate errors, they still occur. In order to achieve a better understanding of medical errors in clinical practice in times of uncertainty, it is necessary to identify how diverse pressures can affect clinical decisions, and how these interact to influence clinical outcomes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document