Monitoring, complacency, scepticism and eutactic behaviour

By Neville Moray. 2003

82 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

1. Wendy A. Rogers
2. Arthur D. Fisk
3. Sara E. McBride
4. Dietrich Manzey
5. John D. Lee
6. Jennifer Elin Bahner
7. Anke-Dorothea Hüper
8. Katrina A. See

In Social Psychology

1. Dietrich Manzey
2. Sara E. McBride
3. Wendy A. Rogers
4. Arthur D. Fisk
5. John D. Lee
6. Jennifer Elin Bahner
7. Anke-Dorothea Hüper
8. Katrina A. See

In Surgery

1. Dietrich Manzey
2. Wendy A. Rogers
3. John D. Lee
4. Arthur D. Fisk
5. Jennifer Elin Bahner
6. Anke-Dorothea Hüper
7. Sara E. McBride
8. Katrina A. See

Citations in the corpus

• Trust in Automation: Designing for Appropriate Reliance (2004, background): “Another explanation is that operators adopt a eutactic monitoring pattern that can be considered optimal because it balances the costs of monitoring and the probability of failures (Moray, 2003).”
• Understanding human management of automation errors (2013, background): “Moray (2003) has pointed out that the manner in which complacency has been studied is ambiguous.”
• Misuse of automated decision aids: Complacency, automation bias and the impact of training experience (2008, methodology): “First, taking the critique of Moray (2003) and Moray and Inagaki (2000) into account, complacency effects are investigated by direct assessment of the automation verification behavior of participants and comparing it to a normative model of optimal non-complacent behavior.”