The Effects of Increasing Degree of Unreliable Automation on Older Adults’ Performance

  • Claire TextorEmail author
  • Richard Pak
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 12209)


Automated technology may help older adults maintain an independent lifestyle (e.g., Mynatt et al. 2004; Labonnote and Høyland 2017). For example, domestic robots could help older adults remain in their homes longer, or cars with semi-autonomous safety technology can help older adults maintain their ability to drive. However, as older adults interact with technology that is more automated (i.e., automation is higher in stage and degree), they may become more subject to the negative effects when that technology fails. This concept of reaping greater benefits of higher degrees of automation that is reliable but suffering catastrophic performance consequences when it is unreliable has been termed the lumberjack effect and has been well documented among younger adults (Endsley and Kiris 1995; Onnasch et al. 2013; Rovira et al. 2017). The cause of this effect is that frequent interaction with reliable, high level automation induces a complacency or disengagement with the task (becoming out of the loop). Thus, when that automation fails, the user has been out of the loop (Endsley and Kiris 1995) and is thus unprepared to resume the task. As older adults have reduced cognitive abilities, they may be even more subject to the lumberjack effect. The purpose of the current study was to examine the presence and magnitude of the lumberjack effect in older adults as it has not yet been documented in the literature. Older and younger adults interacted with various degrees of automation. We replicated the finding that performance was negatively affected on unreliable trials of automation compared to reliable trials for both age groups (i.e., the lumberjack effect). However, these effects did not appear to be more pronounced in older adults. These results are the first to show that the lumberjack effect previously observed in younger adults is equally pronounced in older adults. However, what aspect of aging cognition was the source of this similar lumberjack effect is still an empirical question.


Degree of automation Older adults Working memory 


  1. Bainbridge, L.: Ironies of automation. Automatica 19(6), 775–779 (1983)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Dobbs, A.R., Rule, B.G.: Adult age differences in working memory. Psychol. Aging 4, 500–503 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Endsley, M.R., Kiris, E.O.: The out-of-the-loop performance problem and level of control in automation. Hum. Factors 37(2), 387–394 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Labonnote, L., Høyland, K.: Smart home technologies that support independent living: Challenges and opportunities for the building industry – a systematic mapping study. Intell. Buildings Int. 9(1), 40–63 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Manzey, D., Luz, M., Mueller, S., Dietz, A., Meixensberger, J., Strauss, G.: Automation in surgery: the impact of navigation-control assistance on performance, workload, situation awareness, and acquisition of surgical skills. Hum. Factors 53, 544–599 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. McBride, S.E., Rogers, W.A., Fisk, A.D.: Understanding the effect of workload on automation use for younger and older adults. Hum. Factors 53(6), 672–686 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Morrow, D., North, R., Wickens, C.D.: Reducing and mitigating human error in medicine. Rev. Hum. Factors Ergon. 1(1), 254–296 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Mynatt, E.D., Melenhorst, A.S., Fisk, A.D., Rogers, W.A.: Aware technologies for aging in place: understanding user needs and attitudes. IEEE Pervasive Comput. 3(2), 36–41 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Nof, S.Y. (ed.): Springer Handbook of Automation. Springer, New York (2009). Scholar
  10. Onnasch, L., Wickens, C.D., Li, H., Manzey, D.H.: Human performance consequences of stages and levels of automation: An integrated meta-analysis. Hum. Factors J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 56(3), 476–488 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Pak, R., McLaughlin, A.C., Leidheiser, W., Rovira, E.: The effect of individual differences in working memory in older adults on performance with different degrees of automated technology. Ergonomics 60(4), 518–532 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Parasuraman, R., Manzey, D.H.: Complacency and bias in human use of automation: an attentional integration. Hum. Factors 52(3), 381–410 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Parasuraman, R., Sheridan, T.B., Wickens, C.D.: A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part A Syst. Hum. 30(3), 286–297 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Rovira, E., McGarry, K., Parasuraman, R.: Effects of imperfect automation on decision making in a simulated command and control task. Hum. Factors J. Hum. Factors Ergon. Soc. 49(1), 76–87 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rovira, E., Pak, R., McLaughlin, A.: Effects of individual differences in working memory on performance and trust with various degrees of automation. Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci. 18(6), 573–591 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rybash, J.M., Roodin, P.A., Hoyer, W.J.: Adult Development and Aging, 3rd edn. Brown & Benchmark, Dubuque (1995)Google Scholar
  17. Salthouse, T.A.: The aging of working memory. Neuropsychology 8, 535–543 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Salthouse, T.A.: General and specific speed mediation of adult age differences in memory. J. Gerontol. Psychol. Sci. 51B(1), 30–42 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Sanchez, J., Rogers, W.A., Fisk, A.D., Rovira, E.: Understanding reliance on automation: effects of error type, error distribution, age and experience. Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci. 15, 134–160 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Wickens, C.D., Dixon, S.R.: The benefits of imperfect diagnostic automation: a synthesis of the literature. Theor. Issues Ergon. Sci. 8(3), 201–212 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Wickens, C.D., Hellenberg, J., Xu, X.: Pilot maneuver choice and workload in free flight. Hum. Factors 44(2), 171–188 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Wickens, C.D.: Engineering Psychology and Human Performance, vol. 2nd. Harper Collins, Scranton (1992)Google Scholar
  23. Unsworth, N., Engle, R.W.: The nature of individual differences in working memory capacity: active maintenance in primary memory controlled search from secondary memory. Psychol. Rev. 114(1), 104–132 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Clemson UniversityClemsonUSA

Personalised recommendations