Comparison of a Brain-Based Adaptive System and a Manual Adaptable System for Invoking Automation

OBJECTIVE Two experiments are presented examining adaptive and adaptable methods for invoking automation. BACKGROUND Empirical investigations of adaptive automation have focused on methods used to invoke automation or on automation-related performance implications. However, no research has addressed whether performance benefits associated with brain-based systems exceed those in which users have control over task allocations. METHOD Participants performed monitoring and resource management tasks as well as a tracking task that shifted between automatic and manual modes. In the first experiment, participants worked with an adaptive system that used their electroencephalographic signals to switch the tracking task between automatic and manual modes. Participants were also divided between high- and low-reliability conditions for the system-monitoring task as well as high- and low-complacency potential. For the second experiment, participants operated an adaptable system that gave them manual control over task allocations. RESULTS Results indicated increased situation awareness (SA) of gauge instrument settings for individuals high in complacency potential using the adaptive system. In addition, participants who had control over automation performed more poorly on the resource management task and reported higher levels of workload. A comparison between systems also revealed enhanced SA of gauge instrument settings and decreased workload in the adaptive condition. CONCLUSION The present results suggest that brain-based adaptive automation systems may enhance perceptual level SA while reducing mental workload relative to systems requiring user-initiated control. APPLICATION Potential applications include automated systems for which operator monitoring performance and high-workload conditions are of concern.