Shared control versus traded control in driving: a debate around automation pitfalls

dc.contributor.author Winter, J.C.F. de
dc.contributor.author Petermeijer, S.M.
dc.contributor.author Abbink, D.A.
dc.date.accessioned 2023-06-13T06:53:30Z
dc.date.available 2023-06-13T06:53:30Z
dc.date.issued 2022
dc.description.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.
dc.identifier.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
dc.identifier.uri https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2022.2153175
dc.identifier.uri https://hdl.handle.net/10921/1632
dc.language.iso en
dc.publisher Taylor & Francis
dc.title Shared control versus traded control in driving: a debate around automation pitfalls
dc.type Article
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Shared_control_versus_traded_control_in_driving_a_debate_around_automation_pitfalls.pdf
Size:
2.15 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description: