Deciphering Automation Transparency: Do the Benefits of Transparency Differ Based on Whether Decision Recommendations Are Provided?

ObjectiveTo better understand automation transparency, we experimentally isolated the effects of additional information and decision recommendations on decision accuracy, decision time, perceived workload, trust, and system usability.BackgroundThe benefits of automation transparency are well documented. Previously, however, transparency (in the form of additional information) has been coupled with the provision of decision recommendations, potentially decreasing decision-maker agency and promoting automation bias. It may instead be more beneficial to provide additional information without decision recommendations to inform operators' unaided decision making.MethodsParticipants selected the optimal uninhabited vehicle (UV) to complete missions. Additional display information and decision recommendations were provided but were not always accurate. The level of additional information (no, medium, high) was manipulated between-subjects, and the provision of recommendations (absent, present) within-subjects.ResultsWhen decision recommendations were provided, participants made more accurate and faster decisions, and rated the UV system as more usable. However, recommendation provision reduced participants' ability to discriminate UV system information accuracy. Increased additional information led to faster decisions, lower perceived workload, and higher trust and usability ratings but only significantly improved decision (UV selection) accuracy when recommendations were provided.ConclusionIndividuals scrutinized additional information more when not provided decision recommendations, potentially indicating a higher expected value of processing that information. However, additional information only improved performance when accompanied by recommendations to support decisions.ApplicationIt is critical to understand the potential differential impact of, and interaction between, additional display information and decision recommendations to design effective transparent automated systems in the modern workplace.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Published
2025-02-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208251318465
Citations
4
Primary Topic
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
9.75

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Deciphering Automation Transparency: Do the Benefits of Transparency Differ Based on Whether Decision Recommendations Are Provided?

Shayne Loft, Vanessa K. Bowden, Monica Tatasciore, Isabella Gegoff
4 citations
Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
9.75
article

Deciphering Automation Transparency: Do the Benefits of Transparency Differ Based on Whether Decision Recommendations Are Provided?

Shayne Loft, Vanessa K. Bowden, Monica Tatasciore, Isabella Gegoff
article en
4 citations

Abstract

ObjectiveTo better understand automation transparency, we experimentally isolated the effects of additional information and decision recommendations on decision accuracy, decision time, perceived workload, trust, and system usability.BackgroundThe benefits of automation transparency are well documented. Previously, however, transparency (in the form of additional information) has been coupled with the provision of decision recommendations, potentially decreasing decision-maker agency and promoting automation bias. It may instead be more beneficial to provide additional information without decision recommendations to inform operators' unaided decision making.MethodsParticipants selected the optimal uninhabited vehicle (UV) to complete missions. Additional display information and decision recommendations were provided but were not always accurate. The level of additional information (no, medium, high) was manipulated between-subjects, and the provision of recommendations (absent, present) within-subjects.ResultsWhen decision recommendations were provided, participants made more accurate and faster decisions, and rated the UV system as more usable. However, recommendation provision reduced participants' ability to discriminate UV system information accuracy. Increased additional information led to faster decisions, lower perceived workload, and higher trust and usability ratings but only significantly improved decision (UV selection) accuracy when recommendations were provided.ConclusionIndividuals scrutinized additional information more when not provided decision recommendations, potentially indicating a higher expected value of processing that information. However, additional information only improved performance when accompanied by recommendations to support decisions.ApplicationIt is critical to understand the potential differential impact of, and interaction between, additional display information and decision recommendations to design effective transparent automated systems in the modern workplace.

Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics SocietyVol. 67(8)
The University of Western Australia (AU)
Australian Research Council
Reduced inequalities, Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 3%
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
9.75
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.