Suchergebnisse

Objective This work aims to further test the theory that trust mediates the interdependency between automation reliability and the rate of human reliance on automation. Background Human trust in automation has been the focus of many research studies. Theoretically, trust has been proposed to impact human reliance on automation by mediating the relationship between automation reliability and the rate of human reliance. Experimentally, however, the results are contradicting as some confirm the mediating role of trust, whereas others deny it. Hence, it is important to experimentally reinvestigate this role of trust and understand how the results should be interpreted in the light of existing theory. Method Thirty-two subjects supervised a swarm of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in foraging missions in which the swarm provided recommendations on whether or not to collect potential targets, based on the information sensed by the UAVs. By manipulating the reliability of the recommendations, we observed changes in participants' trust and their behavioral responses. Results A within-subject mediation analysis revealed a significant mediation role of trust in the relationship between swarm reliability and reliance rate. High swarm reliability increased the rate of correct acceptances, but decreased the rate of correct rejections. No significant effect of reliability was found on response time. Conclusion Trust is not a mere by-product of the interaction; it possesses a predictive power to estimate the level of reliance on automation. Application The mediation role of trust confirms the significance of trust calibration in determining the appropriate level of reliance on swarm automation.

AbstractParticipatory modeling (PM) is a craft that is often learned by training 'on the job' and mastered through years of practice. There is little explicit knowledge available on identifying and documenting the skills needed to perform PM. In the modeling literature, existing attempts to identify relevant competencies have focused on the specific technical skills required for specific technical model development. The other skills required to organize and conduct the stakeholder process seem to be more vaguely and poorly defined in this context. The situation is complicated by PM being an essentially transdisciplinary craft, with no single discipline or skill set to borrow ideas and recommendations from. In this paper, we aim to set the foundation for both the practice and capacity-building efforts for PM by identifying the relevant core competencies. Our inquiry into this topic starts with reviewing and compiling literature on competencies in problem-solving research areas related to PM (e.g., systems thinking, facilitated model building, operations research, and so forth). We augment our inquiry with results from a PM practitioners' survey to learn how they perceive the importance of different competencies and how the scope of these competencies may vary across the various roles that participatory modellers play. As a result, we identified five core competency areas essential for PM: systems thinking, modeling, group facilitation, project management and leadership, and, more recently, designing and running virtual workshops and events.

System-of-systems approaches for integrated assessments have become prevalent in recent years. Such approaches integrate a variety of models from different disciplines and modeling paradigms to represent a socioenvironmental (or social-ecological) system aiming to holistically inform policy and decision-making processes. Central to the system-of-systems approaches is the representation of systems in a multi-tier framework with nested scales. Current modeling paradigms, however, have disciplinary-specific lineage, leading to inconsistencies in the conceptualization and integration of socio-environmental systems. In this paper, a multidisciplinary team of researchers, from engineering, natural and social sciences, have come together to detail socio-technical practices and challenges that arise in the consideration of scale throughout the socioenvironmental modeling process. We identify key paths forward, focused on explicit consideration of scale and uncertainty, strengthening interdisciplinary communication, and improvement of the documentation process. We call for a grand vision (and commensurate funding) for holistic system-of-systems research that engages researchers, stakeholders, and policy makers in a multi-tiered process for the co-creation of knowledge and solutions to major socio-environmental problems. ; National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) under the National Science Foundation [DBI-1639145]; Australian Government Research Training Program (AGRTP) ScholarshipAustralian Government; ANU Hilda-John Endowment Fund; USDAUnited States Department of Agriculture (USDA); ARSUnited States Department of Agriculture (USDA)USDA Agricultural Research Service [58-3091-6-035]; Texas A&M AgriLife Research; Key Program of NSF of China [41930648]; NSFNational Science Foundation (NSF) [EEC 1937012] ; Published version ; This work was supported by the National Socio-Environmental Synthesis Center (SESYNC) under funding received from the National Science Foundation DBI-1639145. The primary author (Takuya Iwanaga) is supported through an Australian Government Research Training Program (AGRTP) Scholarship and a top-up scholarship from the ANU Hilda-John Endowment Fund. Hsiao-Hsuan Wang and Tomasz E. Koralewski acknowledge partial support from USDA, ARS Agreement No. 58-3091-6-035 with Texas A&M AgriLife Research, titled `Areawide pest management of the invasive sugarcane aphid in grain sorghum, regional population monitoring and forecasting.' Min Chen is supported by the Key Program of NSF of China (No. 41930648). John Little acknowledges partial support from NSF Award EEC 1937012. The authors would like to thank the three anonymous reviewers and Prof. Randall Hunt (USGS) for their constructive feedback and comments. The authors additionally thank Faye Duchin and Adrian Hindes for comments provided on an earlier draft. ; Public domain authored by a U.S. government employee