Individual Differences in Monitoring Failures of Automation

Subjects included 24 non-pilots who performed simulated flight-related tasks of tracking, fuel-management, and system monitoring. Tracking and fuel management were performed manually, whereas system monitoring was automated. Subjects were required to detect system malfunctions not detected by the automation (automation failures). The reliability of the automation remained constant or varied over time. Subjects detected significantly fewer automation failures in the constant-reliability automation condition than in the variable-reliability condition. Inefficiency in monitoring for automation failure was examined in relation to three individual-difference measures: the Complacency Potential Rating Scale, the Eysenck Personality Inventory (introversion-extraversion), and a modified version of Thayer's Activation-Deactivation Adjective Check List (energetic arousal). These measures were not significantly intercorrelated, suggesting their relative independence. For subjects with high-complacency-potential scores, there was a correlation of - .42 between complacency potential and detection rate of automation failures. Introversion-extraversion was unrelated to monitoring performance. Finally, high energetic-arousal subjects had initially higher detection rates in the constant-reliability condition than did low-arousal subjects. The results suggest a modest relationship between individual differences in complacency potential and energetic-arousal and automation-related monitoring inefficiency.