Department of Psychology, New Mexico State University,Las Cruces, NM 88003-8001, USA.
J Exp Psychol Appl. 2011 Dec;17(4):320-31. doi: 10.1037/a0024243. Epub 2011 Jun 27.
Automated diagnostic aids prone to false alarms often produce poorer human performance in signal detection tasks than equally reliable miss-prone aids. However, it is not yet clear whether this is attributable to differences in the perceptual salience of the automated aids' misses and false alarms or is the result of inherent differences in operators' cognitive responses to different forms of automation error. The present experiments therefore examined the effects of automation false alarms and misses on human performance under conditions in which the different forms of error were matched in their perceptual characteristics. Young adult participants performed a simulated baggage x-ray screening task while assisted by an automated diagnostic aid. Judgments from the aid were rendered as text messages presented at the onset of each trial, and every trial was followed by a second text message providing response feedback. Thus, misses and false alarms from the aid were matched for their perceptual salience. Experiment 1 found that even under these conditions, false alarms from the aid produced poorer human performance and engendered lower automation use than misses from the aid. Experiment 2, however, found that the asymmetry between misses and false alarms was reduced when the aid's false alarms were framed as neutral messages rather than explicit misjudgments. Results suggest that automation false alarms and misses differ in their inherent cognitive salience and imply that changes in diagnosis framing may allow designers to encourage better use of imperfectly reliable automated aids.
自动化诊断辅助工具容易产生误报，这往往会导致信号检测任务中的人类表现不如同样可靠但容易误报的辅助工具。然而，目前尚不清楚这是由于自动化辅助工具的误报和假警在感知显著性上的差异造成的，还是由于操作人员对不同形式的自动化错误的认知反应存在固有差异造成的。因此，本实验在不同形式的错误在感知特征上相匹配的情况下，考察了自动化假警和误报对人类绩效的影响。年轻的成年参与者在一个模拟的行李 X 光检查任务中，由一个自动化诊断辅助工具协助完成。辅助工具的判断结果以在每个试验开始时呈现的文本消息的形式呈现，并且每个试验后都会有第二个文本消息提供响应反馈。因此，辅助工具的误报和假警在感知显著性上是匹配的。实验 1 发现，即使在这些条件下，辅助工具的假警也会导致人类表现更差，对辅助工具的使用意愿降低，而不是辅助工具的误报。然而，实验 2 发现，当辅助工具的假警报被框定为中性信息而不是明确的误判时，误报和假警报之间的不对称性会降低。结果表明，自动化假警和误报在其固有的认知显著性上存在差异，并暗示改变诊断框架可能允许设计人员鼓励更好地使用不完善的可靠自动化辅助工具。
