To automate or not to automate: advocating the ‘cliff-edge’ principle

13Citations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

We reflect briefly on the last forty years or so of ergonomics and human factors research in automation, observing that many of the issues being discussed today are the same as all those decades ago. In this paper, we explicate one of the key arguments regarding the application of automation in complex safety-critical domains, which proposes restraining the capabilities of automation technology until it is able to fully and completely take over the task at hand. We call this the ‘cliff-edge’ principle of automation design. Instead, we espouse a use for the technology in a more problem-driven, human-centred way. These are not entirely new ideas and such a philosophy is already gaining traction in ergonomics and human factors. The point is that in a given system, tasks should be controlled either by human or by automation; anything in between only causes problems for system performance.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Young, M. S., & Stanton, N. A. (2023). To automate or not to automate: advocating the ‘cliff-edge’ principle. Ergonomics. Taylor and Francis Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1080/00140139.2023.2270786

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free