Automation Error Bias, Trust, and Dependence Behaviors in a Simulated Drone Collision Avoidance Task

ObjectiveThis experiment examined how error biases of an imperfect automated decision aid system impacted trust and dependency behaviors in a simulated drone collision avoidance task.BackgroundPrior work on human-automation interaction indicates asymmetrical effects of error biases, misses, and false alarms, on compliance and reliance. Yet, it is unclear whether the effect is due to unbalanced perceptual salience of the automation errors or their trust toward the automated system.MethodSixty-eight participants interacted with a drone monitoring task with the assistance of a collision avoidance aid that varied in error bias (i.e., miss-prone and false-alarm prone). Participants' automation trust ratings and dependency behaviors (i.e., compliance and reliance) were measured.ResultsWith error biases equally salient, participants showed a similar decrease in levels of trust along multiple factors of automation trust when interacting with unreliable automation aids. Compliance rates were higher when interacting with a miss-prone system than a false-alarm prone system, whereas reliance rates showed the opposite pattern.ConclusionError bias determines compliance and reliance behaviors systematically. Saliency-matched false alarm and miss errors by automation degrade trust, potentially undermining the development of performance-based trust.ApplicationDesigners of automated systems should consider how different error types systematically affect dependency behaviors to create transparent systems that properly calibrate trust to the capability of the automation.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Published
2026-02-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/00187208261425068
Primary Topic
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Automation Error Bias, Trust, and Dependence Behaviors in a Simulated Drone Collision Avoidance Task

Yusuke Yamani, Jeffrey Glassman, Austin Jackson, Eric T. Chancey et al.
Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
article

Automation Error Bias, Trust, and Dependence Behaviors in a Simulated Drone Collision Avoidance Task

Yusuke Yamani, Jeffrey Glassman, Austin Jackson, Eric T. Chancey, Michael S. Politowicz, T Sato
article en

Abstract

ObjectiveThis experiment examined how error biases of an imperfect automated decision aid system impacted trust and dependency behaviors in a simulated drone collision avoidance task.BackgroundPrior work on human-automation interaction indicates asymmetrical effects of error biases, misses, and false alarms, on compliance and reliance. Yet, it is unclear whether the effect is due to unbalanced perceptual salience of the automation errors or their trust toward the automated system.MethodSixty-eight participants interacted with a drone monitoring task with the assistance of a collision avoidance aid that varied in error bias (i.e., miss-prone and false-alarm prone). Participants' automation trust ratings and dependency behaviors (i.e., compliance and reliance) were measured.ResultsWith error biases equally salient, participants showed a similar decrease in levels of trust along multiple factors of automation trust when interacting with unreliable automation aids. Compliance rates were higher when interacting with a miss-prone system than a false-alarm prone system, whereas reliance rates showed the opposite pattern.ConclusionError bias determines compliance and reliance behaviors systematically. Saliency-matched false alarm and miss errors by automation degrade trust, potentially undermining the development of performance-based trust.ApplicationDesigners of automated systems should consider how different error types systematically affect dependency behaviors to create transparent systems that properly calibrate trust to the capability of the automation.

Human Factors The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society
Langley Research Center (US), Wichita State University (US), Dominion University College (GH), Old Dominion University (US)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
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.