MABA-MABA or Abracadabra? Progress on Human-Automation Co-ordination

Substitution (logic)
DOI: 10.1007/s101110200022 Publication Date: 2003-03-20T20:38:12Z
ABSTRACT
In this paper we argue that substitution-based function allocation methods (such as MABA-MABA, or Men-Are-Better-At/Machines-Are-Better-At lists) cannot provide progress on human–automation co-ordination. Quantitative ‘who does what’ allocation does not work because the real effects of automation are qualitative: it transforms human practice and forces people to adapt their skills and routines. Rather than re-inventing or refining substitution-based methods, we propose that the more pressing question on human–automation co-ordination is ‘How do we make them get along together?’
SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL
Coming soon ....
REFERENCES (0)
CITATIONS (241)
EXTERNAL LINKS
PlumX Metrics
RECOMMENDATIONS
FAIR ASSESSMENT
Coming soon ....
JUPYTER LAB
Coming soon ....