The role of automation etiquette and task-criticality on performance, workload, automation reliance, and user confidence

Previous research suggests good automation etiquette can yield positive effects on user performance, trust, automation reliance, and user confidence - especially in personified or anthropomorphized technologies. The current study examined the impact of automation etiquette and task-criticality in non-personified technology. The study used a computer-based automation task to examine good and bad automation etiquette models and different domain-based task-criticality levels (between-subjects) that contained various stages of automation (stage 2 and stage 3) and automation reliability levels (60% and 80%) (within-subjects). The study found that bad automation etiquette can increase automation bias and automation reliance which improved performance in the most capable automation condition (stage 3; 80% reliable) but also heightened user subjective workload and decreased user self-confidence. The study also demonstrated task-criticality can be successfully manipulated through domain and instructions. Overall, automation etiquette influenced performance and user confidence more in highly capable automation (stage 3) and in a low-criticality task domain.