Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The effect of distractor modality and processing code on human-automation interaction

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Cognition, Technology & Work Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We examined the effect of distractor characteristics (modality and processing code) on visual search performance and interaction with an automated decision aid. Multiple Resource Theory suggests that concurrent tasks that are processed similarly (e.g. two visual tasks) will cause greater interference than tasks that are not (e.g., a visual and auditory task). The impact of tasks that share processing and perceptual demands and their interaction with human-automation interaction is not established. In order to examine this, participants completed two blocks of a luggage screening simulation with or without the assistance of an automated aid. For one block, participants performed a concurrent distractor task drawn from one of four combinations of modality and processing code: auditory-verbal; auditory-spatial; visual-verbal; visual-spatial. We measured sensitivity, criterion setting, perceived workload, system trust, perceived system reliability, compliance, reliance, and confidence. Participants demonstrated highest sensitivity when performing with an auditory-spatial secondary task. Automation compliance was higher when the auditory-spatial distraction was present versus absent; however, system trust was highest in the auditory-verbal condition. Confidence (when disagreeing with the aid) was also highest when the distractor was auditory. This study indicates that some forms of auditory ‘distractors’ may actually help performance; these results further contribute to understanding how distractions influence performance when operators interact with automation and have implications for improved work environment and system design.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amezcua C, Guevara MA, Ramos-Loyo J (2005) Effects of musical tempi on visual attention ERPS. Int J Neurosci 115:193–206

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bodner E, Gilboa A, Amir D (2007) The unexpected side effects of dissonance. Psychol Music 35:286–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burgoon JK, Bonito JA, Bengtsson B, Cederberg C, Lundeberg M, Allspach L (2000) Interactivity in human-computer interaction: a study of credibility, understanding, and influence. Comput Hum Behav 16:553–574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caggiano DM, Parasuraman R (2004) The role of memory representation in the vigilance decrement. Psychom Bull Rev 11:932–937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cockerton T, Moore S, Norman D (1997) Cognitive test performance and background music. Percept Mot Skills 85:1435–1438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corritore CL, Kracher B, Wiedenbeck S (2003) On-line trust: concepts, evolving themes, a model. Int J Hum Comput Stud 58:737–758

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cowan N, Barron A (1987) Cross-modal, auditory-visual stroop interference and possible implications for speech memory. Percept Psychophys 41:393–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davenport WG (1972) Vigilance and arousal: effects of different types of background stimulation. J Psychol 82:339–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day R, Lin C, Huang W, Chuang S (2009) Effects of music tempo and task difficulty on multi-attribute decision-making: an eye-tracking approach. Comput Hum Behav 25:130–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Vries P, Midden C, Bouwhuis D (2003) The effects of errors on system trust, self-confidence, and the allocation of control in route planning. Int J Hum Comput Stud 58:719–735

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra JJ (1995) The influence of an expert system on the user’s view: how to fool a lawyer. New Rev Appl Expert Syst 1:123–138

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra JJ (1999) User agreement with incorrect expert system advice. Behav Inf Technol 18:399–411

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas KM, Bilkey DK (2007) Amusia is associated with deficits in spatial processing. Nat Neurosci 10:915–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dzindolet MT, Peterson SA, Pomranky RA, Pierce LG, Beck HP (2003) The role of trust in automation reliance. Int J Hum Comput Stud 58:697–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frolov MV, Milovanova GB, Mekhedova A (2005) Effect of musical accompaniment on the operation performance of subjects with different anxiety levels. Hum Physiol 31:164–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gomez P, Danuser B (2007) Relationships between musical structure and psychophysiological measures of emotion. Emotion 7:377–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grootjen M, Neerincx MA, Veltman JA (2006) Cognitive task load in a naval ship control centre: from identification to prediction. Ergonomics 49:1238–1264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart SG, Staveland LE (1988) Development of NASA-TLX (task load index): results of empirical and theoretical research. In: Hancock PA, Meshkati N (eds) Human mental workload. Oxford, North-Holland, pp 138–183

    Google Scholar 

  • Jausovec N, Habe K (2005) The influence of Mozart’s Sonata K. 488 on brain activity during the performance of spatial rotation and numerical tasks. Brain Topogr 17:207–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jian JY, Bisantz AM, Drury CG (2000) Foundations for an empirically determined scale of trust in automated systems. Int J Cogn Ergon 4:53–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D (1973) Attention and effort. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  • Laurie NE, Zhang S, Mundoli R, Duffy SA, Collura J, Fisher DL (2004) An evaluation of alternative do not enter signs; failures of attention. Transp Res Part F Traffic Psychol Behav 7:151–166

    Google Scholar 

  • Lidji P, Kolinsky R, Lochy A, Morais J (2007) Spatial associations for musical stimuli: a piano in the head? J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 33:1189–1207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madhavan P, Wiegmann DA (2007a) Similarities and differences between human-human and human-automation trust: an integrative review. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 8:277–301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Madhavan P, Wiegmann DA (2007b) Effects of information source, pedigree, and reliability on operator interaction with decision support systems. Hum Factors 49:773–785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matthews R, Legg S, Charlton S (2003) The effect of cell phone type on drivers subjective workload during concurrent driving and conversing. Accid Anal Prev 35:451–457

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molloy R, Parasuraman R (1996) Monitoring an automated system for a single failure: vigilance and task complexity effects. Hum Factors 38:311–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Navon D, Gopher D (1979) On the economy of the human-processing system. Psychol Rev 86:214–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norman DA, Bobrow DG (1975) On data-limited and resource-limited processes. Cogn Psychol 7:44–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parkes AM, Burnett GE (1993) An evaluation of medium range advance information in route—guidance displays for use in vehicles. In: Proceedings of IEEE—IEE vehicle navigation and information systems conference, pp 238–241

  • Parush A (2005) Speech-based interaction in multitask conditions: impact of prompt modality. Hum Factors 47:591–597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Persson R, Garde AH, Hansen AM, Ørbæk P, Ohlsson K (2003) The influence of production systems on self-reported arousal, sleepiness, physical exertion, and fatigue—consequences of increasing mechanization. Stress Health J Int Soc Investig Stress 19:163–171

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell JA, Mehrabian A (1975) Task, setting, and personality variables affecting the desire to work. J Appl Psychol 60:518–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Salamé P, Baddeley A (1989) Effects of background music on phonological short term memory. Q J Exp Psychol 41A(1):107–122

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanders LD, Poeppel D (2007) Local and global auditory processing: behavioral and ERP evidence. Neuropsychologia 45:1172–1186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schellenberg EG, Nakata T, Hunter PG, Tamoto S (2007) Exposure to music and cognitive performance: tests of children and adults. Psychol Music 35:5–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sillence E, Briggs P, Harris P, Fishwick L (2006) A framework for understand trust factors in web-based health advice. Int J Hum Comput Stud 64:697–713

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sillence E, Briggs P, Harris P, Fishwick L (2007) Health websites that people can trust-the case of hypertension. Interact Comput 19:32–42

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Singh IL, Molloy R, Parasuraman R (1993) Individual differences in monitoring failures of automation. J Gen Psychol 120:357–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sklar AE, Sarter NB (1999) Good vibrations: tactile feedback in support of attention and human automation coordination in event driven domains. Hum Factors 41:543–552

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorkin RD, Kantowitz BH, Kantowitz SC (1988) Likelihood alarm displays. Hum Factors 30:445–459

    Google Scholar 

  • St. John M, Kobus DA, Morrison JG, Schmorrow D (2004) Overview of the DARPA augmented cognition technical integration experiment. Int J Hum Comput Interact 17:131–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stanton NA, Young MS (2005) Driver behavior with adaptive cruise control. Ergonomics 48:1294–1313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Szalma JL, Warm JS, Matthews G, Dember WN, Weiler EM, Meier A, Eggemeier FT (2004) Effects of sensory modality and task duration in performance, workload, and stress in sustained attention. Hum Factors 46:219–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vitense HS, Jacko JA, Emery VK (2003) Multimodal feedback: an assessment of performance and mental workload. Ergonomics 46:68–87

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker J, Alicandri E, Sedney C, Roberts K (1991) In: Vehicle navigation devices: effects on the safety of driver performance. Vehicle navigation and information systems conference proceedings. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, pp 499–525

  • Weinstein LF, Wickens CD (1992) Use of nontraditional flight displays for the reduction of central visual overload in the cockpit. Int J Aviat Psychol 2(2):121–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Welford AT (1952) The “psychological refractory period” and the timing of high speed performance: a review and a theory. Br J Psychol 43:2–19

    Google Scholar 

  • Welford AT (1959) Evidence of a single-channel decision mechanism limiting performance in a serial reaction task. Q J Exp Psychol 2:193–210

    Google Scholar 

  • Wickens CD (2002) Multiple resources and performance prediction. Theor Issues Ergon Sci 3:159–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Younho S, Bisantz AM, Gattie GJ (2006) Trust, decision aiding, and feedback: an integrated approach. In: Kirlik A (ed) Adaptive perspectives on human-technology interaction: methods and models for cognitive engineering and human-computer interaction. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 105–113

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Old Dominion University, Mills Godwin Building 250, Norfolk, VA, 23529, USA

    Rachel R. Phillips & Poornima Madhavan

Authors
  1. Rachel R. Phillips
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Poornima Madhavan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rachel R. Phillips.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Phillips, R.R., Madhavan, P. The effect of distractor modality and processing code on human-automation interaction. Cogn Tech Work 13, 233–244 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-010-0163-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10111-010-0163-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation