Abstract
Even as future robots grow in intelligence and autonomy, they may continue to face uncertainty in their decision making and sensing. A critical issue, then, is designing future robots so that humans can work with them collaboratively, thereby creating effective human-robot teams. Operators of robot systems can mitigate the problems of robot uncertainty by maintaining awareness of the relevant elements within the mission and their interrelationships, a cognitive state known as situation awareness (SA). However, as evidenced in other complex systems, such as aircraft, this is a difficult task for humans. In this paper, we consider how application of the science of human teaming, specifically task design and task interdependence in human teams, can be applied to human-robot teams and how it may improve human-robot interaction by maximizing situation awareness and performance of the human team member.
Chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Endsley, M.R., Kiris, E.O.: The Out-of-the-Loop Performance Problem and Level of Control in Automation. Human Factors 37, 381–394 (1995)
Schuster, D., Jentsch, F., Fincannon, T., Ososky, S.: The Impact of Type and Level of Automation on Situation Awareness and Performance in Human-Robot Interaction. In: HCI International, Las Vegas (in press, 2013)
Endsley, M.R.: Situation Awareness Global Assessment Technique (SAGAT). In: IEEE 1988 National Aerospace and Electronics Conference, vol. 3, pp. 789–795 (1988)
Rousseau, R., Tremblay, S., Breton, R.: Defining and Modeling Situation Awareness: A Critical Review. In: Banbury, S., Tremblay, S. (eds.) A Cognitive Approach to Situation Awareness: Theory and Application, pp. 3–21. Ashgate, Burlington (2004)
Salas, E., Prince, C., Baker, D.P., Shrestha, L.: Situation Awareness in Team Performance: Implications for Measurement and Training. Human Factors 37, 123–136 (1995)
Durso, F.T., Sethumadhavan, A.: Situation awareness: Understanding Dynamic Environments. Human Factors 50, 442–448 (2008)
Parasuraman, R., Cosenzo, K.A., De Visser, A.E.: Adaptive Automation for Human Supervision of Multiple Uninhabited Vehicles: Effects on Change Detection, Situation Awareness, and Mental Workload. Military Psychology 21, 270–297 (2009)
Johnson, M., Bradshaw, J.M., Feltovich, P.J., Hoffman, R.R., Jonker, C., Van Riemsdijk, B., Sierhuis, M.: Beyond Cooperative Robotics: The Central Role of Interdependence in Coactive Design. IEEE Intelligent Systems 26(3), 81–88 (2011)
Georgeolopousis, B.S.: Organizational Structure, Problem Solving, and Effectiveness. Jossey-Bass, San Fracnsisco (1986)
Cummings, T.G.: Self-Regulating Work Groups: A Socio-Technical Synthesis. The Academy of Management Review 3(3), 625–634 (1978)
Thompson, J.D.: Organizations in Action. McGraw-Hill, New York (1967)
Staudenmayer, N.: Interdependency: Conceptual, Empirical, & Practical Issues. Technical report. Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1997)
Wageman, R.: The meaning of interdependence. In: Turner, M.E. (ed.) Groups at Work, pp. 197–217. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah (2001)
Langfred, C.W.: Autonomy and Performance in Teams: The Multilevel Moderating Effect of Task Interdependence. Journal of Management 31, 513–529 (2005)
Van Der Vegt, G., Van De Vliert, E.: Intragroup Interdependence and Effectiveness: Review and Proposed Directions for Theory and Practice. Journal of Managerial Psychology 17, 50–67 (2002)
Langfred, C.W., Shanley, M.T.: Small Group Research: Autonomous Teams and Progress in Issues of Context and Levels of Analysis. In: Golembiewski, R. (ed.) Handbook of Organizational Behavior, 2nd edn., pp. 81–111. Marcel Dekker, New York (2001)
Saavedra, R., Earley, P.C., Van Dyne, L.: Complex Interdependence in Task-Performing Groups. Journal of Applied Psychology 78(1), 1 (1993)
LePine, J.A., Piccolo, R.F., Jackson, C.L., Mathieu, J.E., Saul, J.R.: A Meta-Analysis of Teamwork Processes: Tests of a Multidimensional Model and Relationships with Team Effectiveness Criteria. Personnel Psychology 61, 273–307 (2008)
Liden, R.C., Wayne, S.J., Bradway, L.K.: Task Interdependence as a Moderator of the Relationship between Group Control and Performance. Human Relations 50(2), 169–181 (1997)
Johnson, M., Bradshaw, J.M., Feltovich, P.J., Jonker, C.M., van Riemsdijk, B., Sierhuis, M.: The Fundamental Principle of Coactive Design: Interdependence Must Shape Autonomy. In: De Vos, M., Fornara, N., Pitt, J.V., Vouros, G. (eds.) COIN 2010. LNCS, vol. 6541, pp. 172–191. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)
Stewart, G.L., Barrick, M.R.: Team Structure and Performance: Assessing the Mediating Role of Intrateam Process and the Moderating Role of Task Type. The Academy of Management Journal 43(2), 135–148 (2000)
Riley, J.M., Strater, L.D., Chappell, S.L., Connors, E.S., Endsley, M.R.: Situation Awareness in Human-Robot Interaction: Challenges and User Interface Requirements. In: Barnes, M., Jentsch, F. (eds.) Human-Robot Interactions in Future Military Operations, pp. 171–191. Ashgate, Surrey (2010)
Wickens, C.D., Li, H., Sebok, A., Sarter, N.B.: Stages and Levels of Automation: An Integrated Meta-Analysis. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 54, pp. 389–393 (2010)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this paper
Cite this paper
Schuster, D., Jentsch, F. (2013). Increasing Robot Autonomy Effectively Using the Science of Teams. In: Shumaker, R. (eds) Virtual Augmented and Mixed Reality. Designing and Developing Augmented and Virtual Environments. VAMR 2013. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 8021. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39405-8_35
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-39405-8_35
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-39404-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-39405-8
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)