Advertisement

Value Sensitive Design of Automated Workload Distribution Support for Traffic Control Teams

  • Maaike Harbers
  • Mark A. Neerincx
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8532)

Abstract

This paper studies the effects of automated support for workload distribution in traffic control teams on human values such as security, autonomy and privacy. The paper describes a workshop in which the support system’s stakeholders, their values, and the effects of the support system on these values were analyzed. The workshop results were used to derive design recommendations that minimize the negative effects on the stakeholders’ values. The main conclusions are that in order to minimize negative impacts on privacy, trust and team spirit, the type and amount of information that is shared to improve workload distribution should be adjustable, depending on the role of the receiving party.

Keywords

Team Member Cognitive Load Team Leader Workshop Participant Sensitive Design 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Carroll, J.M., Rosson, M.B., Convertino, G., Ganoe, C.H.: Awareness and teamwork in computer-supported collaborations. Interacting with Computers 18(1), 21–46 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kraut, R., Dabbish, L.: Awareness displays and social motivation for coordinating communication. Information Systems Research 19(2), 221–238 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    de Greef, T., van der Kleij, R., Brons, L., Brinkman, W.-P., Neerincx, M.: Observability displays in multi-teams. In: NDM (2011)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    DeChurch, L.A., Mesmer-Magnus, J.R.: The cognitive underpinnings of effective teamwork: a meta-analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 95(1), 32 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Detweiler, C., Hindriks, K., Jonker, C.: Principles for value-sensitive agent-oriented software engineering. In: Weyns, D., Gleizes, M.-P. (eds.) AOSE 2010. LNCS, vol. 6788, pp. 1–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Flanagan, M., Howe, D.C., Nissenbaum, H.: Embodying Values in Technology: Theory and Practice, pp. 322–353. Cambridge University Press (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Friedman, B., Hendry, D.: The envisioning cards: A toolkit for catalyzing humanistic and technical imaginations. In: Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 1145–1148. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Friedman, B., Kahn, P.H., Borning, A.: Value sensitive design and information systems. In: Human-Computer Interaction and Management Information Systems: Foundations, pp. 348–372 (2006)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    van Lamsweerde, A.: Requirements Engineering. John Wiley & Sons (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Manders-Huits, N.: What values in design? The challenge of incorporating moral values into design. Science and Engineering Ethics 17(2), 271–287 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mehrabian, A.: Pleasure-arousal-dominance: A general framework for describing and measuring individual differences in temperament. Current Psychology 14(4), 261–292 (1996)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Miller, J.K., Friedman, B., Jancke, G.: Value tensions in design: the value sensitive design, development, and appropriation of a corporation’s groupware system. In: Proceedings of the 2007 International ACM Conference on Supporting Group Work, pp. 281–290. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nathan, L.P., Klasnja, P.V., Friedman, B.: Value scenarios: a technique for envisioning systemic effects of new technologies. In: CHI 2007 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2585–2590. ACM (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Neerincx, M.A.: Cognitive task load design: model, methods and examples, pp. 283–305. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Neerincx, M.A., Grant, T.: Evolution of electronic partners: Human-automation operations and epartners during planetary missions. Journal of Cosmology 12, 3825–3833 (2010)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Neerincx, M.A.: Modelling cognitive and affective load for the design of human-machine collaboration. In: Harris, D. (ed.) HCII 2007 and EPCE 2007. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4562, pp. 568–574. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Neerincx, M.A., Harbers, M., Lim, D., Van der Tas, V.: Automatic feedback on cognitive load and emotional state of traffic controllers. In: The Current Issue (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Neerincx, M.A., Kennedie, S., Grootjen, M., Grootjen, F.: Modeling the cognitive task load and performance of naval operators. In: Schmorrow, D.D., Estabrooke, I.V., Grootjen, M. (eds.) FAC 2009. LNCS, vol. 5638, pp. 260–269. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Neerincx, M.A., Lindenberg, J.: Situated cognitive engineering for complex task environments. In: Naturalistic Decision Making and Macrocognition, pp. 373–390 (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nielsen, J.: Usability engineering. Elsevier (1994)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nissenbaum, H.: Privacy in context: Technology, policy, and the integrity of social life. Stanford University Press (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Olson, J.S., Grudin, J., Horvitz, E.: A study of preferences for sharing and privacy. In: CHI, pp. 1985–1988. ACM (2005)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Porter, C.O., Hollenbeck, J.R., Ilgen, D.R., Ellis, A.P., West, B.J., Moon, H.: Backing up behaviors in teams: the role of personality and legitimacy of need. Journal of Applied Psychology 88(3), 391 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pressman, R.S., Ince, D.: Software engineering: a practitioner’s approach, vol. 5. McGraw-Hill, New York (1992)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maaike Harbers
    • 1
  • Mark A. Neerincx
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Delft University of TechnologyDelftThe Netherlands
  2. 2.TNO Human FactorsSoesterbergThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations