Flightdeck and Air Traffic Control Collaboration Evaluation (FACE): Evaluating aviation communication in the laboratory and field

A Meta-Analysis of Factors Influencing the Development of Trust in Automation

“…Trust development has been shown to be directly affected by the appropriateness of cues and feedback. For example, amount of feedback (Muir & Moray, 1996), availability of information (Bitan & Meyer, 2007), type of cuing (e.g., spatial cuing for target detection; Wiegmann, McCarley, Kramer, & Wickens, 2006), accuracy and truthfulness of feedback (Sharples et al, 2007;Spain & Bliss, 2008), and effective communication that minimizes conflicting information to the operator (Song & Kuchar, 2003) have each been shown to assert an impact. The effect of the type of alarm on trust development appears to be task dependent.…”

A Meta-Analysis of Factors Influencing the Development of Trust in Automation: Implications for Human-Robot Interaction

“…An increase in automation is predicted for the future, especially in the robotic domain. Sharples et al (2007) suggest that novel technologies for flight deck air traffic control systems have great potential for increasing safety when the system is understood by the team interacting with it. Therefore, operators and users need additional training with capabilities of the systems.…”

Human Factors Measurement for Future Air Traffic Control Systems

“…The widespread introduction of data-link technology is expected to offer significant benefits, including improved shared SA, the ability to better anticipate the needs of other users, and access to an expanding repository of data (Endsley & Kiris, 1995;Endsley & Smolensky, 1998). However, other research has been more prudent in its assessment of the technology, with particular concerns about the use of mixed media, a loss of "party-line" information (Sharples et al, 2007), increased workload, and reduced SA. Additional skills could also be required to operate data link, posing additional HF and human resource challenges.…”

“…However, proposed enhancements based on dynamically adjusting airspace sector boundaries will pose challenges to ATCOs' ability to build and/or maintain situation awareness (SA; Hauland, 2008;Nicholls et al, 2007) and will undoubtedly change workload levels (Kaber, Perry, Segall, & Sheik-Nainar, 2007;Loft, Sanderson, Neal, & Mooij, 2007;Miller & Parasuraman, 2007;Ruigrok & Hoekstra, 2007;Sharples et al, 2007;Willems & Koros, 2007). Futhermore, automation-related issues of trust, complacency (Felici, 2007;Gordon, Kirwan, & Perrin, 2007;Sharples et al, 2007;Subotic, Ochieng, & Straeter, 2007), and overreliance will become increasingly important because of the escalating commitment to automation in future ATM systems. Finally, as the ATCO's role changes from active ("hands-on") controller to relatively passive monitor, human factors (HF) issues, such as boredom, vigilance, monotony, motivation (Hitchcock et al, 2003;Stedmon et al, 2007;Straussberger & Schaefer, 2007), and stress, will become progressively critical.…”