Human Performance Consequences of Automated Decision Aids

By Dietrich Manzey, Juliane Reichenbach, Linda Onnasch. 2012

281 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Radiological and Ultrasound Technology, Social Psychology, Surgery

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Radiological and Ultrasound Technology

In Social Psychology

In Surgery

Citations in the corpus

Rapid Trust Calibration through Interpretable and Uncertainty-Aware AI (2020, background): “61 Conversely, algorithm aversion occurs when humans disregard algorithms that actually perform better than humans, thus affecting trust calibration in the opposite direction to automation bias.”
Human–Agent Teaming for Multirobot Control: A Review of Human Factors Issues (2014, background): “degree to which he/she relies (or over relies) on the automation [89], [90].”
Human Trust in Artificial Intelligence: Review of Empirical Research (2020, background): “Similarly, Manzey et al. (2012) found that an erroneous function had a stronger effect on trust than a correct function, and that the trust recovery process was very long.”
Automation bias and verification complexity: a systematic review (2017, background): “Prospective memory task (48) 88 engineering students 5 * 40 mins – P< .”
Complacency and Automation Bias in the Use of Imperfect Automation (2015, methodology): “Without AFIRA support, even the well-trained manual group hovered at around 50% initial diagnostic accuracy, far below the 80% to 90% level obtained in prior research (Bahner et al., 2008; Manzey et al., 2012).”
Trust in Automation (2015, background): “Manzey et al. (2012) showed that negative past experiences led to reduced trust in an automated fault identification system.”
Human Performance Consequences of Stages and Levels of Automation (2014, background): “…and, typically, later stages (which, in the literature, are typically preceded by automation at earlier stages), we assume, in the analysis given later, that these two dimensions (higher levels and later stages) increase the degree of automation (DOA; e.g., Manzey, Reichenbach, & Onnasch, 2012).”
Complacency and Bias in Human Use of Automation: An Attentional Integration (2010, background): “…given the operational definition of complacency and automation bias in the set of studies we have described (e.g., Bahner, Huper, et al., 2008; Manzey et al., 2009), the view that the observed effects reflect an inevitable side effect of a rational strategy used by operators in interacting…”
From Here to Autonomy (2017, background): “Manzey et al. (2012) found that about half of people who accepted incorrect system advice failed to verify the recommendation, and the other half apparently checked all the relevant information but still followed the wrong advice, showing a lower level of SA associated with passive processing.”