Automation Technology and Human Performance: Current Research and Trends

By Mark W. Scerbo | Go to book overview
Save to active project

alarms resulted in increased response rates to the central alarm. From the graph it appears that, in fact, there may also be an interaction, where there are even larger differences during occasions of lower cognitive relatedness rather than higher. However, a significant interaction was not found. Results indicate that alarm number may overcome the confirming strategy used during situations of low functional component dependency. Although people knew the components were functionally independent, an increase in overall alarm number resulted in a deviation in this cognitive strategy. No other effects were found for responses made.

From viewing Figure 2, it appears that response confidence steadily increased as the assumed functional dependency between component pairs increased. A trend analysis revealed that there was, in fact, a positive linear relationship between functional dependency and response confidence F(1,22)<14.78, p<.001. Moreover, a four-factor mixed ANOVA revealed reveal a significant effect for experience on response confidence F(1,20)=5.27,p<.05. As participants gained experience responding to the alarm, they became more confident in their adopted strategy. Response confidence increased in spite of no performance feedback being provided to participants. Also, even though no differences in response strategies were found between automobile experts and novices, a difference between these groups existed in terms of their response confidence, where those who were more knowledgeable in mechanics tended to be more confident in their responses F(1,20)=5.70, p<.03.

Figure 1 . Mean response rates to the 60 percent true center alarm plotted as a function of perceived functional dependency between components, for two and four alarms.

CONCLUSIONS

It was found that participants' response rates to a 60 percent true alarm increased as the degree of functional dependency between two implicated components increased. Response rates ranged from well below to well above 60 percent in a linear fashion as the degree of agreement between components increased, demonstrating a systematic heuristic based upon cognitive relationships for all who participated regardless of expertise in automobile mechanics. This means that although participants may have ranked the same component pairs as having a different level of dependency, they all tended to use the degree of dependency

-304-

Notes for this page

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this page

Cited page

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited page

Bookmark this page
Automation Technology and Human Performance: Current Research and Trends
Table of contents

Table of contents

Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this book

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen
/ 348

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?