Complacency and Bias in Human Use of Automation: An Attentional Integration

Notes

## Bibliographic Note

Parasuraman, R. & Manzey, D. H. (2010) 'Complacency and bias in human use of automation: an attentional integration', *Human Factors*, 52(3), pp. 381–410. doi: 10.1177/0018720810376055.

Review and integrated theoretical model of two automation-induced human performance costs — automation complacency (poorer monitoring/detection of automation failures under multitask load) and automation bias (omission and commission errors when following imperfect decision aids). Argues both share an attentional basis and arise from the dynamic interaction of personal, situational, and automation-related characteristics, with positive ("learned carelessness") and negative (failure-driven) feedback loops. Proposes eye-tracking and attention-sampling measures, compared against a normative model of optimal attention allocation, as the proper operational definition. Compiled in full into [[automation-complacency-and-bias]]; complements Parasuraman & Riley's use/misuse/disuse/abuse taxonomy ([[use-misuse-disuse-abuse-of-automation]]) by the same first author. PDF→orig offset +380 (PDF p. N = orig. p. N+380).

```bibtex
@article{parasuraman2010complacency,
  author  = {Parasuraman, Raja and Manzey, Dietrich H.},
  title   = {Complacency and Bias in Human Use of Automation: An Attentional Integration},
  journal = {Human Factors},
  year    = {2010},
  volume  = {52},
  number  = {3},
  pages   = {381--410},
  doi     = {10.1177/0018720810376055}
}
```

Related Articles

Notes