Improving reliability awareness to support appropriate trust and reliance on individual combat identification systems

Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society

Volumn 1, Issue , 2008, Pages 292-296

  Wang, Lu ^a   Jamieson, Greg A ^b   Hollands, Justin G ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c DEFENCE RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT CANADA   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATION; FIGHTER AIRCRAFT; RELIABILITY;

AUTOMATED SYSTEMS; COMBAT IDENTIFICATION; COMBAT IDENTIFICATION SYSTEMS; INFANTRY SOLDIERS; RELIABILITY INFORMATION;

ERGONOMICS;

EID: 70350614240     PISSN: 10711813     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (12)

1. Beck, H. P., Dzindolet, M. T., & Pierce, L. G. (2007). Automation usage decisions: Controlling intent and appraisal errors in target detection task. Human Factors, 46 (1), 50-80.
2. Chi, C., & Drury, C. G. (1998). Do people choose an optimal response criterion in an inspection task? IIE Transactions, 30 (3), 257-266.
3. Dzindolet, M. T., Pierce, L. G., Beck, H. P., Dawe, L. A., & Anderson, B. W. (2001a). Predicting misuse and disuse of combat identification systems. Military Psychology, 13 (3), 147-164.
4. Dzindolet, M. T., Pierce, L., Pomranky, R., Peterson, S., & Beck, H. (2001b). Automation reliance on a combat identification system. In Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society (pp. 532-536). Minneapolis/St. Paul, MN: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
5. Jian, J., Bisantz, A. M., & Drury, C. G. (2000). Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 4 (1), 53-71.
6. Karsh, R., Walrath, J. D., Swoboda, J. C., & Pillalamarri, K. (1995). Effect of battlefield combat identification system information on target identification time and errors in a simulated tank engagement task. (Technical report ARL-TR-854). Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD: Army Research Lab.
7. Kogler, T. M. (2003). The effects of degraded vision and automatic combat identification reliability on infantry friendly fire engagements. Unpublished master's thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, VA.
8. Lee, J. D., & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46 (1), 50-80.
9. Maltz, M., & Shinar, D. (2003). New alternative methods of analyzing human behavior in cued target acquisition. Human Factors, 45 (2), 281-296.
10. Sheridan, T., & Parasuraman, R. (2006). Humanautomation interaction. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 1, 89-129.
11. Sherman, K. (2000). Combat identification system for the dismounted soldier. In Proceedings of SPIE 2000: Digitization of the Battlespace V and Battlefield Biomedical Technologies II (pp. 135-146). Orlando, FL: the International Society for Optical Engineering.
12. Winer, B. J. (1991). In Brown D. R., Michels K. M. (Eds.), Statistical principles in experimental design (3rd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.