Citation

Chu Y, Liu P. Ergonomics 2023; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2023, Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/00140139.2023.2210793

PMID

37139680

Abstract

Given that automation complacency, a hitherto controversial concept, is already used to blame and punish human drivers in current accident investigations and courts, it is essential to map complacency research in driving automation and determine whether current research can support its legitimate usage in these practical fields. Here, we reviewed its status quo in the domain and conducted a thematic analysis. We then discussed five fundamental challenges that might undermine its scientific legitimation: conceptual confusion exists in whether it is an individual versus systems problem; uncertainties exist in current evidence of complacency; valid measures specific to complacency are lacking; short-term laboratory experiments cannot address the long-term nature of complacency and thus their findings may lack external validity; and no effective interventions directly target complacency prevention. The Human Factors/Ergonomics community has a responsibility to minimize its usage and defend human drivers who rely on automation that is far from perfect.

Language: en

Keywords

Traffic crash; complacency; driving automation; overreliance; responsibility attribution