The reliability of assistance systems modulates the sense of control and acceptability of human operators.
Journal
Scientific reports
ISSN: 2045-2322
Titre abrégé: Sci Rep
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101563288
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 09 2023
02 09 2023
Historique:
received:
06
10
2022
accepted:
23
08
2023
medline:
4
9
2023
pubmed:
3
9
2023
entrez:
2
9
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Individuals are increasingly required to interact with complex and autonomous technologies, which often has a significant impact on the control they experience over their actions and choices. A better characterization of the factors responsible for modulating the control experience of human operators is therefore a major challenge to improve the quality of human-system interactions. Using a decision-making task performed in interaction with an automated system, we investigated the influence of two key properties of automated systems, their reliability and explicability, on participants' sense of agency (SoA), as well as the perceived acceptability of system choices. The results show an increase in SoA associated with the most explicable system. Importantly, the increase in system explicability influenced participants' ability to regulate the control resources they engaged in the current decision. In particular, we observed that participants' SoA varied with system reliability in the "explained" condition, whereas no variation was observed in the "non-explained" condition. Finally, we found that system reliability had a direct impact on system acceptability, such that the most reliable systems were also considered the most acceptable systems. These results highlight the importance of studying agency in human-computer interaction in order to define more acceptable automation technologies.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37660173
doi: 10.1038/s41598-023-41253-8
pii: 10.1038/s41598-023-41253-8
pmc: PMC10475027
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
14410Informations de copyright
© 2023. Springer Nature Limited.
Références
Behav Res Methods. 2009 Nov;41(4):1149-60
pubmed: 19897823
J Neurosci. 2022 Apr 27;42(17):3622-3635
pubmed: 35304428
Front Hum Neurosci. 2014 Jul 15;8:443
pubmed: 25076880
Ergonomics. 2018 Sep;61(9):1282-1297
pubmed: 29683404
Trends Cogn Sci. 2012 Feb;16(2):106-13
pubmed: 22245618
Conscious Cogn. 2008 Mar;17(1):136-44
pubmed: 17306565
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 1998;2(2):137-54
pubmed: 15647141
Conscious Cogn. 2012 Sep;21(3):1267-79
pubmed: 22541646
Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. 2021 Jun;21(3):561-572
pubmed: 33009653
Front Psychol. 2019 Jun 27;10:1406
pubmed: 31316418
Conscious Cogn. 2015 Nov;36:87-95
pubmed: 26100602
Front Psychol. 2013 Mar 15;4:127
pubmed: 23508565
Nat Hum Behav. 2020 Oct;4(10):1067-1079
pubmed: 32747804
Cognition. 2015 May;138:122-31
pubmed: 25724007
Cognition. 2022 May;222:105020
pubmed: 35033865
Atten Percept Psychophys. 2019 Oct;81(7):2304-2319
pubmed: 31165456
Curr Biol. 2016 Mar 7;26(5):585-92
pubmed: 26898470
Neuropsychologia. 2019 Feb 4;123:152-158
pubmed: 29723599
PLoS Comput Biol. 2019 Sep 6;15(9):e1007326
pubmed: 31490934
PLoS One. 2012;7(3):e34075
pubmed: 22479528
Nat Rev Neurosci. 2017 Apr;18(4):196-207
pubmed: 28251993
JAMA. 2013 Nov 27;310(20):2191-4
pubmed: 24141714
Conscious Cogn. 2010 Mar;19(1):481-9
pubmed: 19896868
Hum Factors. 2001 Winter;43(4):573-83
pubmed: 12002006
Sci Rep. 2021 Jan 28;11(1):2436
pubmed: 33510395
Exp Brain Res. 2013 Sep;229(3):475-84
pubmed: 23288323
Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):437-42
pubmed: 9176953
Conscious Cogn. 2019 Oct;75:102819
pubmed: 31541968
Br Med J. 1964 Jul 18;2(5402):177
pubmed: 14150898
Cognition. 2013 Dec;129(3):574-8
pubmed: 24060604
Nat Neurosci. 2002 Apr;5(4):382-5
pubmed: 11896397
Spat Vis. 1997;10(4):433-6
pubmed: 9176952