Effects of Aging and Workload on Monitoring of Automation Failures

Abstract

HUMAN ERROR ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS (HERCA) started after a review of the data from DOE s Occurrence Reporting Processing System (ORPS). This review showed that about two-thirds of occurrences had human error listed as a cause. Considering procedures, training and man-machine interfaceare separate categories, this number jumps to over 95% of occurrences. A critical review of the human error category within ORPS showed no differentiation of human errors into components.Enhancement Process (HPES), the NRC's Human Performance Investigative Process (HPIP), INEL's HSYS, and the commercial TAPROOT system, it was concluded that human error can be divided into eight major categories of causes, with differentiation into specific causes within each of these major categories. It was decided to adapt NRC's accident analysis techniques to DOE.HERCA does not replace standard techniques such as MORT or REASON, it supplements them. Once a more standard accident analysis technique has identified a human performance deficiency as a component in the occurrence, then the HERCA technique can be used to help the investigator determine why the human error occurred. HERCA has two basic parts; 1) the decision tree which leads the user through a series of questions with answers directing him to 2) one of eight major cause categories which categorize and define the human error root cause. HERCA emphasizes task analysis for human error analysis but also uses standard accident analysis techniques (such as Event and Causal Factor charting, change analysis, and barrier analysis) to assist the investigator in determining the true cause of occurrences with human error.

Complacency and Bias in Human Use of Automation: An Attentional Integration

“…With respect to other sources of individual or group differences, there do not appear to be any gender differences in complacency. However, adult age differences in automation complacency have been reported, with older adults exhibiting greater automation-related complacency but only under very high workload conditions (Hardy, Mouloua, Dwivedi, & Parasuraman, 1995;Vincenzi, Muldoon, Mouloua, Parasuraman, & Molloy, 1996).…”

Anthropomorphic Interfaces on Automation Trust, Dependence, and Performance inYounger and Older Adults

“…Exerting more cognitive resources to complete a task may lead the user to rely on automation after task demands become too difficult to manage. There are also age differences in complacency that have occurred under equivalent high workload conditions, where older adults display greater complacency than younger adults (Hardy, Mouloua, Dwivedi, & Parasuraman, 1995;Vincenzi, Muldoon, Mouloua, Parasuraman, & Molloy, 1996. If workload only partially contributes to increases in complacency, other age-related factors must be involved as well.…”

The Effects of Age and Working Memory Demands on Automation-Induced Complacency

“…Exerting more cognitive resources to complete a task may lead the user to rely on automation after task demands become too difficult to manage. There are also age differences in complacency that have occurred under equivalent high workload conditions, where older adults display greater complacency than younger adults (Hardy, Mouloua, Dwivedi, & Parasuraman, 1995;Vincenzi, Muldoon, Mouloua, Parasuraman, & Molloy, 1996, Ho et al, 2005b. If workload only partially contributes to increases in complacency, other age-related factors must be involved as well.…”