Accountability and automation bias

International Journal of Human Computer Studies

Volumn 52, Issue 4, 2000, Pages 701-717

  Skitka, Linda J ^a   Mosier, Kathleen ^b   Burdick, Mark D ^c  

^a VA Chicago Hlth Care Syst W S   (United States)

^b SAN FRANCISCO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c SAN JOSE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATION; BEHAVIORAL RESEARCH; DECISION MAKING; ERROR DETECTION;

AUTOMATION BIAS; SOCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY;

HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION;

EID: 0034172662     PISSN: 10715819     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/ijhc.1999.0349     Document Type: Article

References (32)

1. Aviation and Space Technology. 138:1993;17.
2. AZAR B. Danger of automation: it makes us complacent. Psychological Monitor. 29:1998;18.
3. BILLINGS C. E. Human-centered aircraft automation: Principles and guidelines. 1996;NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field.
4. BREWER M. B., CRANO W. D. Social Psychology. 1994;West Publishing, St. Paul.
5. CHAIKEN S. Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message and cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 39:1980;752-766.
6. CVETKOVICH G. Cognitive accommodation, language, and social responsibility. Social Psychology Quarterly. 41:1978;149-155.
7. DONEY P. M., ARMSTRONG G. M. Effects of accountability on symbolic information search and information analysis by organizational buyers. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science. 24:1996;57-65.
8. FISKE S. T., TAYLOR S. E. Social Cognition. 1994;McGraw-Hill, New York.
9. HAGAFORS R., BREHMER B. Does having to justify one's decisions change the nature of the decision process? Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 31:1983;223-232.
10. JOHNSON E. J., PAYNE J. W., SCHKADE D. A., BETTMAN J. R. Monitoring information processing and decisions: The Mouselab system. 1991;University of PennsylvaniaThe Wharton School, Philadelphia.
11. LAYTON C., SMITH P. J., MCCOY C. E. Design of a cooperative problem-solving system for en-route flight planning an empirical evaluation. Human Factors. 36:1994;94-119.
12. MCALLISTER P. W., MITCHELL T. R., BEACH L. R. The contingency model for the selection of decision strategies: an empirical test of the effects of significance, accountability, and reversibility. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 24:1979;228-244.
13. MOLLOY R., PARASURAMAN R. Monitoring an automated system for a single failure: vigilance and task complexity effects. Human Factors. 38:1996;311-322.
14. MOSIER K. L., PALMER E. A., DEGANI A. Electronic checklists: implications for decision making. Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 36th Annual Meeting. 1992;Human Factors Society, Santa Monica. p. 7-11.
15. MOSIER K. L., SKITKA L. J., BURDICK M., HEERS S. Automation bias: decision making and performance in high-tech cockpits. International Journal of Aviation Psychology. 8:1998;47-63.
16. MOSIER K., SKITKA L. J., KORTE K. Cognitive and social psychological issues in flight crew/automation interaction. Proceedings of the Automation Technology and Human Performance Conference. 1994;Sage.
17. Window/panes: workload PerformANcE simulation. 1989;Rotorcraft Human Factors Research Branch, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field.
18. PARASURAMAN R., MOULOUA M., MOLLOY R. Effects of adaptive task allocation on monitoring of automated systems. Human Factors. 38:1997;665-679.
19. PARASURAMAN R., RILEY V. Humans and automation: use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors. 39:1997;230-253.
20. ROZELLE R. M., BAXTER J. C. The influence of role pressures on the perceiver: judgments of videotaped interviews varying judge accountability and responsibility. Journal of Applied Psychology. 66:1981;437-441.
21. SIEGEL-JACOBS K., YATES J. F. Effects of procedural and outcome accountability on judgment quality. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 65:1996;1-17.
22. SIMONSON I., NYE P. The effect of accountability on susceptibility to decision errors. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes. 51:1992;416-446.
23. SKITKA, L. J. MOSIER, K. L. 1994, Automation bias: when, where and why ?, Judgment and Decision-Making Society.
24. SKITKA L. J., MOSIER K. L., BURDICK M. Does automation bias decision-making? International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 1999.
25. TETLOCK P. E. Accountability and the perseverance of first impressions. Social Psychology Quarterly. 46:1983;74-83.
26. TETLOCK P. E. Accountability: a social check on the fundamental attribution error. Social Psychology Quarterly. 48:1985a;227-236.
27. TETLOCK P. E. Accountability and complexity of thought. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 45:1985b;74-83.
28. TETLOCK P. E. An alternative metaphor in the study of judgment and choice: people as politicians. Theory and Psychology. 1:1991;451-475.
29. TETLOCK P. E., BOETTGER R. Accountability? A social magnifier of the dilution effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 57:1989;388-398.
30. TETLOCK P. E., BOETTGER R. Accountability amplifies the status quo effect when change creates victims. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making. 7:1994;1-23.
31. TETLOCK P. E., KIM J. I. Accountability and judgment processes in a personality prediction task. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 52:1987.
32. TETLOCK P. E., SKITKA L. J., BOETTGER R. Social and cognitive strategies for coping with accountability: conformity, complexity and bolstering. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 57:1989;632-640.