Shared control versus traded control in driving: a debate around automation pitfalls
Shared control versus traded control in driving: a debate around automation pitfalls
Date
2022
Authors
Winter, J.C.F. de
Petermeijer, S.M.
Abbink, D.A.
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Taylor & Francis
License Holder
Copyright 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
Licence Type
his is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
Sponsor
Abstract
A major question in human-automation interaction is whether tasks should be traded or shared between human and automation. This work presents reflections—which have evolved through classroom debates between the authors over the past 10 years—on these two forms of human-automation interaction, with a focus on the automated driving domain. As in the lectures, we start with a historically informed survey of six pitfalls of automation: (1) Loss of situation and mode awareness, (2) Deskilling, (3) Unbalanced mental workload, (4) Behavioural adaptation, (5) Misuse, and (6) Disuse. Next, one of the authors explains why he believes that haptic shared control may remedy the pitfalls. Next, another author rebuts these arguments, arguing that traded control is the most promising way to improve road safety. This article ends with a common ground, explaining that shared and traded control outperform each other at medium and low environmental complexity, respectively.
Description
Keywords
Citation
J. C. F. de Winter, S. M. Petermeijer & D. A. Abbink (2022) Shared control versus traded control in driving: a debate around automation pitfalls, Ergonomics, DOI: 10.1080/00140139.2022.2153175