Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
SpringerLink
Log in

Systemgestaltung und Automatisierung

  • Chapter
Human Factors

Auszung

Cali, Kolumbien, 20.12.1995. Flug AA965 befindet sich, aus Miami kommend, im Anflug auf Cali in Kolumbien. Das Cockpit dieser Boeing 757 ist mit zahlreichen automatisierten Systemen ausgestattet, die die Piloten bei ihren Flugführungsaufgaben unterstützen und so zu einer hohen Flugsicherheit beitragen sollen. Herzstück der Automation ist das sog. Flight Management System (FMS), das in Kombination mit dem Autopiloten zentrale Aufgaben der Navigation, Flugzeugführung und Systemüberwachung übernimmt. Die Aufgabe der Piloten besteht dabei nur noch darin, die jeweilige Flugroute bzw. die anzufliegenden Funkfeuer in das System einzugeben. Das eigentliche Abfliegen der Route müssen die Piloten dann nur noch anhand der Informationen auf einem Navigationsbildschirm überwachen. Darüber hinaus verfügt das Flugzeug auch über zahlreiche automatisierte Warn- und Alarmsysteme, wie z. B. das sog.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literatur

  • Aeronautica Civil of the Republic of Columbia (1996). AA965 Cali accident report. Prepared for the WWW by Peter Ladkin, University of Bielefeld, Germany. [verfügbar unter http://www.rvs.uni-bielefeld.de/publications/Incidents/DOCS/ ComAndRep/Cali/calirep.html Zugriff am 31.08.2006]

    Google Scholar 

  • Annett, J. & Stanton, N. (Eds.) (2000). Task analysis. London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bainbridge, L. (1983). Ironies of automation. Automatica, 19, 775–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Billings, C. E. (1997). Aviation automation. The search for a human-centered approach. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boeing Commercial Airline Group (2005). Statistical summary of commercial jet aircraft accidents: Worldwide operations 1959–2005. [verfügbar unter: http://www.boeing.com/ news/techissues/pdf/statsum/pdf Zugriff am 22.09.2006].

  • Byrne, E. A. & Parasuraman, R. (1996). Psychophysiology and adaptive automation. Biological Psychology, 42, 249–268.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Christoffersen, K. & Woods, D. D. (2002). How to make automated systems team players. In E. Salas (Ed.), Advances in human performance and cognitive engineering research. Vol. 2. Automation (pp. 1–12). BURLington: Elsevier.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dearden, A., Harrison, M. & Wright, P. (2000). Allocation of function: Scenarios, context and the economics of effort. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 52, 289–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dzindolet, M. T., Peterson, S. A., Pomranky, R. A., Pierce, L. G. & Beck, H. P. (2003). The role of trust in automation reliance. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 58, 697–718.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endsley, M. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors, 37, 85–104.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Endsley, M. R., Bolté, B. & Jones, D. B. (2003). Designing for situation awareness. An approach to user-centered design. London: Taylor & Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Endsley, M. R. & Kiris, E. O. (1995). The out-of-the-loop performance problem and level of control in automation. Human Factors, 37, 381–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fitts, P. M. (Ed.) (1951). Human engineering for an effective air navigation and traffic-control system. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Research Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grote, G., Ryser, C., Wäfler, T., Windischer, A. & Weik, S. (2000). KOMPASS: A method for complementary function allocation in automated work systems. Intermational Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 52, 267–287.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hacker, W. (1989). Vollständige vs. unvollständige Arbeitstätigkeiten. In S. Greif, H. Holling & N. Nicholson (Hrsg.). Arbeits-und Organisationspsychologie. Internationales Handbuch in Schlüsselbegriffen (S. 463–466). München: Psychologie Verlags Union.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hackman, J. R. & Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work redesign. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hauß, Y & Timpe, K.-P. (2000). Automatisierung und Unterstützung im Mensch-Maschine-System. In K.-P. Timpe, T. Jürgensohn & H. Kolrep (Hrsg.), Mensch-Maschine-Systemtechnik. Konzepte, Modellierung, Gestaltung, Evaluation (S. 41–62). Düsseldorf: Symposion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaber, D. B. & Riley, J. M. (1999). Adaptive automation of a dynamic control task based on secondary-task workload measurement. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 3, 169–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaber, D. B., Riley, J. M., Tan, K.-W. & Endsley, M. R. (2001). On the design of adaptive automation for complex systems. International Journal of Cognitive Ergonomics, 5, 37–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kessel, C. J. & Wickens, C. D. (1982). The transfer of failure-detection skills between monitoring and controlling dynamic systems. Human Factors, 24, 49–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, J. D. & See, K. A. (2004). Trust in automation: Designing for appropriate reliance. Human Factors, 46, 50–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lorenz, B., Di Nocera, F., Röttger, S. & Parasuraman, R. (2002). Automated fault-management in a simulated spaceflight micro-world. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 73, 886–897.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Madhavan, P., Diegmann, D. A. & Lacson, F. C. (2006). Automation failures on tasks easily performed by operators undermine trust in automated aids. Human Factors, 48, 241–256.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Manzey, D. & Bahner, J. E. (2005). Vertrauen in Automation als Aspekt der Verlässlichkeit von Mensch-Maschine-Systemen. In K. Karrer, B. Gauss & C. Steffens (Hrsg.), Beiträge zur Mensch-Maschine-Systemtechnik aus Forschung und Praxis. Festschrift für Klaus-Peter Timpe (S. 93–109). Düssledorf: Symposion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manzey, D., Bahner, J. E. & Hüper, A.-D. (2006). Misuse of automated decision aids: Complacency, automation bias and possible training interventions. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 50 th Annual Meeting. Santa Monica: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moray, N. & Inagaki, T. (2000). Attention and complacency. Theoretical Issues of Ergonomics Science, 1, 354–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mosier, K. L. & Skitka, L. J. (1996). Human decision-makers and automated decision aids: made for each other? In R. Parasuraman & M. Mouloua (Eds.), Automation and human performance: Theory and applications (pp. 201–220). Mawah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parasuraman, R., Molloy, R. & Singh, I. L. (1993). Performance consequences of automation induced „complacency“. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 2, 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parasuraman, R., Mouloua, M. & Molloy, R. (1996). Effects of adaptive task allocation on monitoring of automated systems. Human Factors, 38, 665–679.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parasuraman, R. & Riley, V. (1997). Humans and automation: Use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Human Factors, 39, 230–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T. B. & Wickens, C. D. (2000). A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics — Part A: Systems and Humans, 30, 286–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patrick, J. (1992). Training. Research and practice. London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scallen, S. F. & Hancock, P. A. (2001). Implementing adaptive functional allocation. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 11, 197–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scerbo, M. W. (1996). Theoretical perspectives on adaptive automation. In R. Parasuraman & M. Mouloua (Eds.), Automation and human performance: Theory and applications (pp. 37–63). Mawah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheridan, T. B. (1997). Supervisory control. In G. Salvendy (Ed.), Handbook of human factors (pp. 1295–1327). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, I. L., Molloy, R. & Parasuraman, R. (1993). Automation-induced „complacency“: Development of the complacency rating scale. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 3, 111–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vicente, K. (1999). Cognitive work analysis. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Dietrich Manzey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Product Innovation Management Faculty for Industrial Design Engineering, Delft University of Technology, Landbergstraat 15, 2628 CE, Delft, The Netherlands

    Petra Badke-Schaub  & Kristina Lauche  & 

  2. Krisenmanagement, Hohenheimerstr. 104, 71686, Remseck

    Gesine Hofinger

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2008 Springer Medizin Verlag Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Manzey, D. (2008). Systemgestaltung und Automatisierung. In: Badke-Schaub, P., Hofinger, G., Lauche, K. (eds) Human Factors. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-72321-9_19

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation