Testing risk homeostasis theory in a simulated process control task

1994 ◽  
pp. 45-58
Author(s):  
Neville Stanton ◽  
Thomas Hoyes
Ergonomics ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 59 (5) ◽  
pp. 641-656 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annette Kluge ◽  
Barbara Frank ◽  
Sanaz Maafi ◽  
Aleksandra Kuzmanovska

1989 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 553-577 ◽  
Author(s):  
William B. Stanley ◽  
Robert C. Mathews ◽  
Ray R. Buss ◽  
Susan Kotler-Cope

Four experiments in which subjects learned to control two versions of a complex simulated process control task show that verbalizable knowledge of procedures used to perform these tasks is very limited and is acquired late in learning. Individual learning curves associated with these tasks showed sudden improvements in performance, which were not accompanied by a similar increase in verbalizable knowledge. It was also found that verbal instructions consisting of exemplar memorization, strategies for rule induction, simple heuristics, and experts’ instructions were all effective in enhancing novice subjects’ performance. A theoretical framework is proposed in which subjects draw on two separate but interacting knowledge structures to perform these tasks. One knowledge structure is based on memory for past experiences (close analogies), and the other is based on one's current mental model of the task. Implicit sets of competing rules that control response selection are derived from both sources of knowledge. It is suggested that dissociations between task performance and verbalizing occur because memory-based processing tends to have more control over response selection because of its greater specificity, whereas a mental model tends to be the preferred mode for verbal reporting because of its greater accessibility.


Author(s):  
Neville Moray ◽  
Toshiuki Inagaki ◽  
Makoto Itoh

Sheridan's “Levels of Automation” were explored in an experiment on fault management of a continuous process control task which included situation adaptive automation. Levels of automation with more or less automation autonomy, and different levels of advice to the operator were compared, with automatic diagnosis whose reliability varied. The efficiency of process control and of fault management were explored under human control and automation in fault management, and aspects of the task in which human or automation were the more efficient defined. The results are related to earlier work on trust and self confidence in allocation of function by Lee, Moray, and Muir.


2019 ◽  
pp. 437-437
Author(s):  
Dirk Schulze-Kissing ◽  
Leon Urbas
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document