Abstract
Humans working in modern work systems are increasingly required to supervise task automation. We examined whether manual aircraft conflict detection skill predicted participants’ ability to respond to conflict detection automation failures in simulated air traffic control. In a conflict discrimination task (to assess manual skill), participants determined whether pairs of aircraft were in conflict or not by judging their relative-arrival time at common intersection points. Then in a simulated air traffic control task, participants supervised automation which either partially or fully detected and resolved conflicts on their behalf. Automation supervision required participants to detect when automation may have failed and effectively intervene. When automation failed, participants who had better manual conflict detection skill were faster and more accurate to intervene. However, a substantial proportion of variance in failure intervention was not explained by manual conflict detection skill, potentially reflecting that future research should consider other cognitive skills underlying automation supervision.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
