By Topic

Crazy clocks: counterintuitive consequences of "intelligent" automation

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

1 Author(s)
Vicente, K.J. ; Lab. of Cognitive Eng., Toronto Univ., Ont., Canada

Human error is a widely recognized problem, and there are at least two complementary paths to error mitigation. One approach aims to reduce error by changing the design of systems and products to make them fit human capabilities and limitations. Another approach aims to remove human error (and human involvement) altogether by automation, sometimes including intelligent systems. The latter approach might seem preferable. After all, if no human is involved, how can there be any human error? Both paths have merit. However, the automatization path might be so tempting that researchers might not realize the new, counterintuitive problems this approach can create. Recent attempts to eliminate human error in programming a VCR provide a poignant example of this concern.

Published in:

Intelligent Systems, IEEE  (Volume:16 ,  Issue: 6 )