Pop Vlad L, Shrewsbury Alex, Durso Francis T
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, Georgia.
Hum Factors. 2015 Jun;57(4):545-56. doi: 10.1177/0018720814564422. Epub 2014 Dec 29.
The objective was to determine whether operators with an expectancy that automation is trustworthy are better at calibrating their trust to changes in the capabilities of automation, and if so, why.
Studies suggest that individual differences in automation expectancy may be able to account for why changes in the capabilities of automation lead to a substantial change in trust for some, yet only a small change for others.
In a baggage screening task, 225 participants searched for weapons in 200 X-ray images of luggage. Participants were assisted by an automated decision aid exhibiting different levels of reliability. Measures of expectancy that automation is trustworthy were used in conjunction with subjective measures of trust and perceived reliability to identify individual differences in trust calibration.
Operators with high expectancy that automation is trustworthy were more sensitive to changes (both increases and decreases) in automation reliability. This difference was eliminated by manipulating the causal attribution of automation errors.
Attributing the cause of automation errors to factors external to the automation fosters an understanding of tasks and situations in which automation differs in reliability and may lead to more appropriate trust.
The development of interventions can lead to calibrated trust in automation.
目的是确定那些预期自动化是可靠的操作员是否更善于根据自动化能力的变化来校准他们的信任，如果是这样，原因是什么。
研究表明，自动化预期方面的个体差异可能能够解释为什么自动化能力的变化会导致一些人对其信任发生重大变化，而另一些人则只有微小变化。
在一项行李安检任务中，225名参与者在200张行李X光图像中搜寻武器。参与者得到了一个展示不同可靠程度的自动决策辅助工具的协助。使用对自动化可靠性的预期测量方法，结合信任和感知可靠性的主观测量方法，来识别信任校准方面的个体差异。
预期自动化可靠程度高的操作员对自动化可靠性的变化（包括提高和降低）更敏感。通过操纵自动化错误的因果归因，这种差异被消除了。
将自动化错误的原因归因于自动化外部的因素，有助于理解自动化可靠性不同的任务和情况，并可能导致更恰当的信任。
干预措施的开发可以带来对自动化的校准信任。
