Abstract
A challenge for designers of safety critical systems is to recognise that human issues are critical to their safe automation. Appropriate techniques for taking account of these issues should be integrated into the design process. This paper provides a brief introduction to a two-step decision procedure for deciding how to automate an interactive system. The method has received preliminary evaluation in aviation and naval contexts. It is intended for use early in the development of systems in larger scale collaborative settings with the aim of improving their safety and performance. The method aids the designer in identifying how to take advantage of the benefits offered by automation so that it does not interfere with the operator’s ability to perform his or her job. It does this by guiding the matching of functions to a set of defined roles.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bainbridge, L. Ironies of automation. In Rasmussen, J., Duncan, J. & Leplat, J. (eds). New Technology and Human Error, pp 276–283, John Wiley & Sons, 1987.
Billings, C.E. Human-Centered Aircraft Automation. Technical report number 103885. NASA AMES Research Center, 1991.
Cook, C.A. & Corbridge, C. Tasks or functions: what are we allocating? In E. Fallon, L. Bannon & J. McCarthy (eds.) ALLFN’97 Revisiting the Allocation of Function Issue: New Perspectives, pp. 115–124. Louisville KY: IEA Press, 1997.
Dearden, A., Harrison, M.D. & Wright, P.C. Allocation of function: scenarios, context and the economics of effort, International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 52(2) 289–318, 2000.
Dearden, A.M. IDA-S: a conceptual framework for partial automation. To appear in: Blandford, A., Vanderdonckt, J. and Gray, P. (eds.) People & Computers XV-Interaction without Frontiers. Proceedings of IHM-HCI 2001. Springer. Berlin, 2001.
Fuld, R.B. The fiction of function allocated, revisited. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 52(2) 217–233, 2000.
Grote, G., Ryser, C., Wafler, T., Windischer, A. & Weik, S. KOMPASS: a method for complementary function allocation in automated work systems. International Journal of Human Computer-Studies. 52(2) 267–288, 2000.
Harrison, M.D. & Bemat, G. What can dynamic function allocation learn from flexible scheduling. University of York. DIRC working paper. 2001.http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/-mdh/papers/harrisonb01.pdf
Johnson, P.D., Harrison, M.D. & Wright, P.C. An enhanced function method. University of Yorkhttp://www.cs.york.ac.ukhmdh/papers/johnsonhw01.pdf
Johnson, P.D., Harrison, M.D. & Wright, P.C. An evaluation of two methods of function allocation. People in Control IEE Press. Conference Publication No. 481. 178–183. 2001.
Kaber, D.B. & Endsley, M.R. The combined effect of level of automation and adaptive automation on human performance with complex, dynamic control systems. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41s` Annual Meeting. pp 205–209. Santa Monica CA.: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 1997.
Lim, K.Y. & Long, J.B. The MUSE Method for usability engineering. Cambridge University Press. 1994.
Malinkowski, U., Kuhme, D.H., Schneider-Hufschmidt, M. A taxonomy of adaptive user interfaces. In Monk, A., Diaper, D. & Harrison, M.D. eds. People and Computers VII, Proceedings of HCI’92. pp 391–414. Cambridge University Press, 1992.
Older, M., Clegg, C & Waterson, P. Report on the revised method of function allocation and its preliminary evaluation. Institute of Work Psychology, University of Sheffield, 1996.
Older, M.T., Waterson, P.E. & Clegg, C.W. A critical assessment of task allocation methods and their applicability. Ergonomics, 40: 151–171, 1997.
Parasuraman, R. & Mouloua, M. (eds). Automation and human performance:theory and applications. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1996.
Pocock, S., Harrison, M.D., Wright, P.C. & Johnson, P.D. THEA: a technique for human error assessment early in design. IFIP TC 13 International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction. IOS Press, 2001.
Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I. & Booch, G. The unified modelling language reference manual. Addison Wesley. 1999.
Sheridan, T.B. and Verplanck, W.L. Human and computer control of undersea teleoperators. Technical report. Man-machine systems lab, Dept of Mechanical Engineering, MIT, Cambridge, MA, 1978.
Sperandio, J.-C. The regulation of working methods as a function of workload among air traffic controllers. Ergonomics 21:195–202, 1978.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2002 Springer-Verlag London
About this paper
Cite this paper
Harrison, M.D., Johnson, P.D., Wright, P.C. (2002). Automating functions in multi-agent control systems: supporting the decision process. In: Redmill, F., Anderson, T. (eds) Components of System Safety. Springer, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0173-4_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4471-0173-4_6
Publisher Name: Springer, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-85233-561-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4471-0173-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive