Department of Psychology, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland.
Ergonomics. 2012;55(8):840-53. doi: 10.1080/00140139.2012.676673. Epub 2012 Apr 16.
The effectiveness of different forms of adaptive and adaptable automation was examined under low- and high-stress conditions, in the form of different levels of noise. Thirty-six participants were assigned to one of the three types of variable automation (adaptive event-based, adaptive performance-based and adaptable serving as a control condition). Participants received 3 h of training on a simulation of a highly automated process control task and were subsequently tested during a 4-h session under noise exposure and quiet conditions. The results for performance suggested no clear benefits of one automation control mode over the other two. However, it emerged that participants under adaptable automation adopted a more active system management strategy and reported higher levels of self-confidence than in the two adaptive control modes. Furthermore, the results showed higher levels of perceived workload, fatigue and anxiety for performance-based adaptive automation control than the other two modes.
This study compared two forms of adaptive automation (where the automated system flexibly allocates tasks between human and machine) with adaptable automation (where the human allocates the tasks). The adaptable mode showed marginal advantages. This is of relevance, given that this automation mode may also be easier to design.
本研究考察了不同形式的自适应和可适应自动化在低压力和高压力条件下的有效性，表现为不同程度的噪声。36 名参与者被分配到三种类型的变量自动化（基于事件的自适应、基于性能的自适应和作为对照条件的可适应）之一。参与者在一个高度自动化的过程控制任务模拟上接受了 3 小时的培训，随后在噪声暴露和安静条件下进行了 4 小时的测试。性能结果表明，一种自动化控制模式没有明显优于其他两种模式。然而，结果表明，在可适应自动化下的参与者采用了更积极的系统管理策略，并报告了比在两种自适应控制模式下更高的自我信心水平。此外，结果表明，基于性能的自适应自动化控制比其他两种模式的感知工作负荷、疲劳和焦虑水平更高。
本研究比较了两种自适应自动化形式（自动化系统在人和机器之间灵活分配任务）和可适应自动化（人类分配任务）。可适应模式显示出了略微的优势。这具有相关性，因为这种自动化模式可能也更容易设计。
