Safety Problems from Technology Over-Reliant

This paper explores the safety concerns in the aviation industry due to over-reliance on technology. It discusses the impact on pilots' roles, accidents resulting from technology failures, and recommendations to address the problem. The research draws on literature reviews and analysis from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board. Subject: Aviation, Course Code: N/A, Course Name: N/A, College/University: N/A

Running head: SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 1
Over Reliant on Technologies That Poses a Greater Safety Concern in Aviation Industry
Author’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 2
Table of Contents
Abstract.......................................................................................................................................................3
Introduction.................................................................................................................................................4
Background of the Problem.........................................................................................................................4
Objectives of the Project..............................................................................................................................5
Overall Objectives...................................................................................................................................6
Specific Objective...................................................................................................................................6
Review of the Relevant Literature...............................................................................................................6
Results.......................................................................................................................................................14
Conclusions from Research.......................................................................................................................19
Recommendations to Address the Problem...............................................................................................19
References.................................................................................................................................................22

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 3
Abstract
This paper aims at exploring how the over reliant on technologies that poses a greater safety
concern in aviation industry. The research draws the appraisal of the pilots operating the controls
manually using the codes and those monitoring the system. The accomplishment of the analysis
includes the appraisal of the literature reviews on the subject as well as the gathering of the
information data from the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board. The analysis mainly
limited to the literature reviews and the analysis from the U.S. National Transportation Safety
Board. In essence, there is no collection primary data for the purposes of this study. Further to
this deficiencies and the major accidents resulting from the over-reliant on technology also
appraised in line with the human factors. Also, the analysis explore the pilots training as per the
automation concept and how the level of training can also accounts for the accidents reported in
the process. Thus, it is used to establish whether the crew roles per the training and the interface
design often decreases or increases the accident rates as well as severity with time.

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 4
Introduction
Technology application and advancement in the aviation have assisted in transforming
the aircraft cockpit as well as help in altering the parametric relationship among the aircraft,
human pilot as well as the environment. Essentially, there has been the evolvement of the pilot
role from interpreting cues and physical manipulation to the system to the monitoring of the
system. The current role of the pilot as far as the aircraft operations are concerned has continued
to play both central and complex role in system as far as the safety is concerned. This paper
therefore gives the overall outline on how the over reliant on technologies that poses a greater
safety concern in aviation industry. first and foremost, aircraft accidents mainly defined as an
event related with the activity of an airship that happens between the time any individual loads
up the airplane with the aim of flight and every single such individual have landed, and in which
any individual endures demise or serious injuries, or in which the air ship gets solemn damage
(Sanchez et al., 2014).
Background of the Problem
The norm of becoming the first in this rarity is something that most people often gives
immense priority. It is also viewed as one lifetime opportunity. The flight concept was being
viewed as fairy stuff tales up-to the time Wright Brothers decided to introduce it to the makeable
world. The same applied to the pilot notion which had no difference. The Wright Brothers
focused on the design works which gave pilots the full control of the craft. However, the roles of
the most pilots have been changed due the application and utilization of the automation. Some of
the roles which the pilots are no longer engaging in include being dreamers, fixers, constructors
as well as fact gatherers (Rovira et al., 2014). In fact, most of the pilots are current perceived as
system observers at the expense of being controllers. Regardless of the overall myriad changes

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 5
associated with automation, most studies depicts the role of the pilots still as not only crucial but
also fundamental. The norm takes the appraisal from the early aviation history and this
incorporated the groundbreaking aeronautical as well as advancements. Both required the people
to flew and test the aircrafts from the start to the end.
Over the time, there has been evolvement in the aviation industry and thus, the passion
fueling the development has often subsided while at the same time the role of the pilots have
continued to change as well. Essentially, major changes has taken place in the aviation industry,
from the time when the pilots were encompassed with the all the roles to the present state in
which they perceived as the working professionals. All the changes have been geared by the
transforming technology and adoption which have led to the complete overall alteration in the
flying industry. All the tasks have been changed from pilot controlling the aircraft to the task
where the pilots are mandated with the role of system monitoring and supervision.
However, the transformations reported in this case cannot fail to have different
consequences. The technology has continued to make the pilots to adjust as well as assisting in
redefining the role of the pilots. Conversely, these redefinitions and the adjustments cannot fail
to have pertinent errors. Subsequently, to err is a notion to human being, and thus, the role which
exists between the human error and the automation cannot be underestimated. Essentially, human
factors have continued to emerge as one of the major contributors to the commercial aviation
accidents. The accidents largely results from the over reliance on the technology in the aviation
field (McBride, Rogers, & Fisk, 2014).

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 6
Objectives of the Project
The objectives of this research largely divided into key sections. The overall objective
and the specific objectives as discussed below
Overall Objectives
The overall objective of this project to assess how the over reliance on the technology
and technological knowhow have continued to increase the accident in the aviation industry.
Specific Objective
There two specific objective outlined for this study. They are discussed as follows
 To assess the accidents associated with failures resulting from the use of technology in
aviation industry.
Review of the Relevant Literature
The argument by most designers indicated that most of the automation technology helps
in reducing the human operator role while at the same reducing the overall consequences
associated with the operator errors. In essence, no one can raise any doubts regarding the role of
automation in improving the performance of the operator. In fact, the norm has helped in
hastening the superiority productivity, quality control as well as efficiency. However, the
realization of the many benefits in the automation sector largely depends on the recognition of
the shortcomings associated with the problems (Edwards et al., 2017, June). Thus, this section
often helps in the discussion of the six prominent problems in line with the automation
technology in the aviation system. The issues under the discussion mainly considered as
makeable drawbacks. The drawbacks largely depicted in the increasing in vigilance requirement
and monitoring, inappropriate feedback, losses of the pilot skills, user interface, over-reliance on

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 7
automation, workload redistribution, mistrust as well as lack of proper familiarization with the
overall system (Körber, & Bengler, 2014, September).
The application of the automation and technology has led the redefinition of the pilot’s
role in the aviation. Essentially, the role has been changed from the manually controlling and
directing the elements to the system monitoring with only fewer direct operations. Preferably, it
is important to note that the level of the technological advancement in the aircraft is what dictates
the manual control and monitoring levels in the aircrafts. The notion of the automation mainly
grounded on the fact that if the pilot is required to tackle few tasks manually, then there are more
subsystem and automated systems which the individual will be required to observe and monitor.
Automation also plays a fundamental role of giving the cues to the system monitoring on the
various informed decisions as well as the required automations in the system (Riley, 2018).
Conversely, there are situations in which the automated systems tend to convey the
incorrect information in line with the operations and status and thereby, diminish the mode
monitoring awareness. It is also important to note that there considerable evidence which shows
that that increasing the automation often lowers the operation involvement in the parametric
system, thus reducing the operator ability. The reduced operator ability has negative impacts
since the pilot is capable of maintaining both the operating states of the aircraft and the system as
a whole. Subsequently, it is always evidential that human beings are not good at making
decisions regarding the monitoring as compared to when the individuals are carrying out the
tasks manually. Thus, the human beings when subjected to the monitors, it is clear that their
performances will likely to decrease in due course (Kelly, & Efthymiou, 2019).

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 8
There is the likelihood of the pilots losing their baseline skills, reducing their decision
making abilities as well as weakening the internal models in the system processes. This is
reported when the pilots engage much in the system monitoring process at the expense being
actively involved in the controlling of the systems. The over-reliance on the technology tends to
reduce the role of the pilot in executing the makeable and key system functions as well as
operations. This out-of-loop time often affects the efficiency of the operations since the norm can
reduce the pilot’s skills and thus, may affect he or she in executing the need tasks when there is
emergency in the system or in the failure and thus, can lead to accidents. The norm largely
perpetuated when there is the overall increase in distance between the system under the
parametric control and the operator. Also, there is the possibility of increased workload being
reported in the situations when the operator will be required to jump directly to the back and
embark on the direct control of the loops as well as system (Hilburn et al., 2018).
From the aviation schools, most of the pilots were sophisticatedly trained on the various
commands and techniques of manipulating the controls to assist in achieving the overall desired
response. On the other hand, the incorporation of the technology requires them to be trained to
the various mechanisms which they can apply when interacting with overall automated systems.
The study on the automation has thus, drawn and developed decisive conclusion the comparison
between the pilots who applies the manual mode and thus, embarking on the automated
controlling systems. The analysis established that those who embarked on the automation as the
simulated process for controlling tasks are much slower as compared the individuals who
operates the system manually (Sebok, & Wickens, 2017).
The manual mode operators are also more effective when compared the automated
controllers in the long run. Also, the analogies regarding the inappropriate feedback as well as

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 9
user interface can also result to the catastrophic in the large automated systems. Furthermore,
there are increased workloads which are associated with the complex interface and system.
Further to this, there are various workloads linked with tactical clues as well as eliminating
visuals and this often accounts for the elevated workloads.
Considerably, most of the automated devices are controlled by the crew when they are
out of the loop (Marquez, Riley, & Schutte, 2018). Thus, whenever the failures are reported then
it will be difficult for them to respond appropriately and immediately if the failure requires the
physical compensatory handling of the equipment. Thus, it is important to have a well-structure
and proper functioning system for handling the automation successfully. The norm may not be
reported and evident in the normal operations and conditions but when the system fails or when
there is an emergency in the system portion (Khastgir, 2018, July).
There have been major advancements which the aircrafts have undergone since the
commencement of the Jet Age. The Jet Age is date to 50 years ago and since then there has been
technological growth in the field. In the recent days, there has been the use of the computer
simulation and programs to guide the on-board flights as well as assist in directing the routes.
The analogy also helps giving the guidelines as far as the weather conditions are concerned. In
essence, there is the application of the Global Positioning System or GPS to direct the planes on
the fly path. Subsequently, there has been integration of the advanced air traffic controls or ATC
technology. Some of the technologies associated with the ATC technologies include radars. The
radars often regarded as accurate devices which assist in providing the useful data and
information. The data and information mainly conveyed for the air traffic controllers (Körber,
Baseler, & Bengler, 2018).

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 10
There is an indication that the air traffic level in the United States of America will
increase sophisticated by 2025. The traditional methods applied in the country and across the
word will not be a position to help in curbing and accommodating the increased passenger’s
level. Thus, it is mandatory to have an overall change in the sector. If the government and the
various states administrations are aiming to reduce the congestion while at the same time stop the
gridlock, then it will be important for them to divert their focus towards the air transportation
improvement. This will result into the growing economy and thus, increased the GDP of the
various countries (De Boer, & Dekker, 2017).
There are major concerns as per the norm of over-reliance on the automation when it
comes to aviation industry. There are various safety concerns which one is likely to encounter in
the process. Essentially, different people always have shown certain levels of susceptible when it
comes to the inappropriate automation and the user behaviors in the long run. Preferably, the
analogy is considered grounds of the self-confidence which most individuals show when
handling the tasks via the application of the automated systems (Kennedy et al., 2017,
September).
However, the considerations of the trust one has in the automation, fatigue response as
well as the incorporation of the different factors in decision making are some of the essential
response which one must consider in the process. Research has also reported that there is
concrete correlation between the over-reliance as well as the mistrust. It is evidential the people
who are highly over-reliance in the technology will tend to trust the overall performance of the
makeable operations. On the other hand, there is the possibility of the inverse occurring in the
due course. However, there are also situations in which one can be mistrusting the automation
and this trust often outweighs the trust in the automation of the system (Das et al., 2018).

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 11
Preferably, automation overreliance can also results to the omissions of the errors,
decreasing vigilance, system parametric disregarding as well out of loop experience. Further to
this, the norm of the mistrust can make the operator not to choose the parametric and automated
system. This can in turn lead to the increased workload as well as making the fixated on the
amicable monitoring system to be disregarded.
Also, the considerable norm associated with lack of familiarity in the automation
technology accounts for the wide range manifestations. The present automation are often
complex. Thus, they are not easy to understand in line with the logic continuity. The norm thus,
has proved not to be easy but rather to be difficult. Thus, the augment has shifted the gaining of
the common practice. This often aims at assisting in the attainment of both the experience and
the informal instructions and enabling one to become proficient in the operation of the automated
systems. In essence, there are also the disregards in the overall understanding of the why and
how the task should be accomplished in line with the automated system (Dominiczak, & Khansa,
2018).
Many flying accidents have been credited to pilots neglecting to recognise basic
automated framework changes. Lack of concern can be credited to pilots setting an excessive
amount of trust in automated frameworks because of the low disappointment rates of
computerised frameworks. This trust is fundamental fabricates to deliver the automated
frameworks to build up however can prompt pilots redirecting their consideration far from the
automated frameworks, along these lines decreasing their situational awareness (Gouraud,
Delorme, & Berberian, 2017, September).

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 12
The likelihood of an undetected computerisation disappointment because of a need in
situational awareness is expanded when automated frameworks carry on sensibly; however in an
off base way. Rather than undetected automated disappointments, observing issues are
additionally pervasive in frameworks delivering high false caution rates. High false alert rates
can deliver an absence of trust, and cause pilots to disregard or cripple visible regular or sound-
related cautioning signs or alerts. Notwithstanding watchfulness, smugness, and observing, the
job the administrator performs; regardless of whether dynamic or detached can contrarily
influence situational awareness. At the point when effectively preparing or controlling
frameworks activities, administrators will, in general, have a simpler time identifying
peculiarities and responding to them (Endsley, 2017).
When playing out a latent eyewitness job of a computerised framework, the administrator
will, in general, have troublesomely deciding the requirement for framework mediation and
arranging themselves to the present framework execution parameters to achieve such a petition.
"Diverting a human administrator from an entertainer into a spectator can, all by itself, contrarily
influence situational awareness, regardless of whether the administrator can work as a
compelling screen, and this can prompt huge issues in taking over amid mechanisation
disappointment (Lewis, Sycara, & Walker, 2018).
Uninvolved preparing of data may likewise restrain the coordination of framework data
into dynamic working memory. Thus, a screen may have a lower appreciation of information
relating to generally speaking framework work. This can additionally make a progressively latent
methodology basic leadership concerning framework information and an over-dependence on
assembling or master proposals as opposed to translation and assessment of real framework
execution. Input is another component that can straightforwardly influence situational awareness.

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 13
Activities require criticism for proper observing, mistake location, blunder adjustment, and for
the administrator performing activities to remain connected with as for framework task. "At the
point when forms are automated, new types of input are made, much of the time fusing
progressively exact visual presentations, yet the way that data is in the other organisation may
make it harder to acclimatise with other data or less striking in a difficult situation (Xiaobin et
al., 2017).
In any case, sufficient input to the human administrators is missing more than it is
available, regardless of whether the framework is a PC working framework, an autopilot or a
phone framework. Mechanization structures have sometimes deliberately disguised data from the
administrator. Absence of criticism precludes learning of undertakings and how frameworks
react to different sources of info, the two of which lead to a decrease in situational awareness.
"Without suitable input, individuals are to be sure unaware of what's going on: they may not
know whether their solicitations have been gotten, if the activities are being performed
legitimately or if issues are happening.
The disposal or change of framework input gave to administrators, regardless of whether
purposeful or coincidental amid the structure procedure, speaks to a free test to administrators
with regards to keeping up situational awareness. Another real hindrance to accomplishing
situational awareness in connection to mechanisation in flight is an absence of comprehension of
computerisation. This theme was quickly referenced while talking about the dimensions of
situational awareness disappointments yet is considerably more unpredictable and requires
further clarification (Muslim, & Itoh, 2018).

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 14
One of the real hindrances to the effective execution of automated is the trouble
numerous administrators have in understanding computerised frameworks, notwithstanding
when they are taking care of them, and the mechanisation is filling in as planned. The innate
multifaceted nature of automated frameworks, poor preparing, and deficient interface plans are a
portion of the main sources of this absence of comprehension (Grabowski, Rowen, & Rancy,
2018).
The improvement and sustainment of situational awareness requires a pilot to follow a
vast amount of quickly changing framework parameters, and afterwards incorporating them with
different parameters, dynamic objectives and one's psychological model of the framework to
comprehend what's going on and venture what the framework will do. This understanding is
basic to allow a pilot to proactively execute as an administrator and take activities as needs be to
anticipate future issues. The issue of comprehension turns out to be increasingly apparent as
framework intricacy increments, as mechanization has done since its initiation.
Undertakings become progressively mind-boggling and requesting, and the framework
itself turns out to be increasingly intricate and hard to get it. With multifaceted nature likewise
comes an expansion in parameters and data that must be observed and comprehended.
Cognizance and projection progressively turned out to be increasingly troublesome and
situational awareness can be lost or become substantially harder to get. Congruity in
configuration changes and advancement are essential to expanding comprehension of complex
computerized frameworks and enable pilots to pick up situational awareness (Karanikas, &
Nederend, 2018).

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 15
Results
The analysis was largely grounded on the literature review and that data gathered from
the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board. The data gathered from the United States of
America Website regarding the various accidents depicted in the aviation industry in line with
the over-reliant on the technology. The discussion on the qualitative data obtained mainly
analyzed and appraised as indicated below (Endsley, 2018, August).
Qualitative analysis was conducted for the data gathered from the U.S. National
Transportation Safety Board to establish the accidents related to the over-reliant of the
technology in the aviation industry. The data applied for this analysis mainly ranges from 2000
onwards. Some of the available data which were obtained for the purposes of this study included
the total accidents, flight hours as well as total fatalities. The flight operations used in the
analysis include the Part 121 and Part 135. All the accidents in line with the reports were
discussed comprehensively and the probable cause assigned to the individual reports as per the
observations made over time. The figure below indicated the total accidents reported in the
aviation industry (Haslbeck, & Hoermann, 2016).

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 16
Figure showing the Total Aviation Accidents resulting in Fatalities (Sauer, Chavaillaz &
Wastell, 2016)
The figure above indicates the various accidents resulting from the flight operations. In
addition to this, it is evidential that the number of accident recorded for the 121 as well as 135
flight operations often estimated at 1165 accidents. Notably, it is clear that out of the overall
number 191 were mainly associated with the makeable fatalities. The majority of the accidents
were mainly considered to have results from human cause as for the 135 flight operations. On the
other hand, the 121 flight operations had the various accidents considered to have resulted from
the five probable ways. This analysis mainly illustrated as indicated in the graph below
Figure showing the Total Aviation Accidents (Part 121 & Part 135) 2000-2010 (Jipp, 2016)
The analysis of the data established different norms in line accidents resulting from the
aviation industry. Some of the key findings include
The results have indicated that there reduction of the overall accidents reported from
2000 to 2010. This can be depicted by the drop in the graph curve as time passes. The analysis is
also applicable to the commercial aviation aircrafts. Essentially, there has been reduction on the
automation related accident as well as the mishaps resulting from the commercial aviation.

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 17
The analysis also establishes that the fatalities related to the 135flight operations are high.
However, there is a gap which tends to be closing from 2009 as a result of the decline.
Essentially, the fatalities are often reported to have dropped sophisticatedly (Talebpour, &
Mahmassani, 2016).
Largely, the aviation industry accident mainly attributed by the human factors sine it was
regarded as the major contributor to the accidents whether for the operations or when applies the
technology in the long run. Notably, there was makeable distribution of the accident as far as the
causes are concerned in line with the 121 operations. The human errors ranges from the
overestimation, underestimations as well as the overall response time which the crew takes to
react the system failure. It is also associated with the over-reliant on the technology. The
accidents resulting from the probable causes in line with the part 121 and part 135 mainly
illustrated as be graphical analysis indicated below (Molesworth, & Koo, 2016).
Figure showing the Accidents by Probable Cause – Part 121(Yamani, & McCarley, 2016)

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 18
Figure showing the Accidents by Probable Cause – Part 135 (Strohmeier et al., 2016, May)
The analysis of the data via the linear and non-linear correlation indicates that there is the
likelihood of the fatal accidents rates increasing with the automation and this possibility may
take place if there is total over-reliant on the technology and over trust. The figures below show
the correlation (Lin et al., 2016, September).

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 19
Figure showing the Non-linear Correlation between Part 135 Mean of HF Fatalities and
Automation (Rusnock et al., 2016, July).
Figure showing the Linear Correlation between Part 121 Mean of HF Accidents and Automation
(Salomon, & Boudreaux, 2016, July)
Conclusions from Research
This explored study the in-depth and comprehensive analysis on how the over-reliant on
technology can results into accidents in the aviation industry. The study depicted that the
automation and the application of the technology in the aviation is fundamental as it ease the
tasks performed by the pilots. Essentially, it helps in simplifying this tasks by enabling the pilots
to embark on the monitoring of the system as opposed to the manual coding and controlling of
the aircraft. However, the problem is depicted when the crew tends to assume that the system is
effective and is 100%. The overruling of the possibilities of having unnoticed failures in the

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 20
system is what actually contributes to the accidents in the aviation industry. This is evident from
both the literature review and the data analysis. The aviation authority should not reliant but
should emphasis on the need to apply both the manual techniques as well as the automation
systems to avoid the accidents.
Recommendations to Address the Problem
The study mainly grounded its discussions on the assumptions which were considered at
specified time period. The automation technology has continued to grow and expand and this can
be depicted by the analysis of both the part 121 as well as 135 operations. The operations were
considered from one year to the next. However, there is need to develop the criteria for analyzing
and quantifying the automated accident effects to explore both the decrease and the increase in
the number.
Preferably, without stating the viable criteria for determining the aspect it will be difficult
to establish the significant relationship as well as patterns which often exist. The severity
resulting from the over-reliant technology will therefore not be clearly been established but
rather the pilot will be blamed focusing the problem via human error. On the other hand,, it is
important to integrate both the pilot in the control and the monitoring and the training should be
offered on both to avoid the accidents resulting from the over-reliant on the technology.

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 21
References
Das, L., Iqbal, M. U., Bhavsar, P., Srinivasan, B., & Srinivasan, R. (2018). Toward Preventing
Accidents in Process Industries by Inferring the Cognitive State of Control Room
Operators through Eye Tracking. ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering, 6(2), 2517-
2528.
De Boer, R., & Dekker, S. (2017). Models of automation surprise: results of a field survey in
aviation. Safety, 3(3), 20.
Dominiczak, J., & Khansa, L. (2018). Principles of Automation for Patient Safety in Intensive
Care: Learning From Aviation. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient
Safety, 44(6), 366-371.
Edwards, T., Martin, L., Bienert, N., & Mercer, J. (2017, June). The relationship between
workload and performance in air traffic control: exploring the influence of levels of
automation and variation in task demand. In International Symposium on Human Mental
Workload: Models and Applications (pp. 120-139). Springer, Cham.
Endsley, M. R. (2017). From here to autonomy: lessons learned from human–automation
research. Human factors, 59(1), 5-27.
Endsley, M. R. (2018, August). Situation Awareness in Future Autonomous Vehicles: Beware of
the Unexpected. In Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (pp. 303-309).
Springer, Cham.
Gouraud, J., Delorme, A., & Berberian, B. (2017, September). A Preliminary Study on the
Influence of Automation over Mind Wandering Frequency in Sustained Attention.
In Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Ergonomics 2017(pp. 31-34).
ACM.

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 22
Grabowski, M., Rowen, A., & Rancy, J. P. (2018). Evaluation of wearable immersive augmented
reality technology in safety-critical systems. Safety science, 103, 23-32.
Haslbeck, A., & Hoermann, H. J. (2016). Flying the needles: flight deck automation erodes fine-
motor flying skills among airline pilots. Human factors, 58(4), 533-545.
Hilburn, B., Molloy, R., Mouloua, M., & Parasuraman, R. (2018). Monitoring of Automated
Systems. In Automation and Human Performance (pp. 111-136). Routledge.
Jipp, M. (2016). Expertise development with different types of automation: A function of
different cognitive abilities. Human factors, 58(1), 92-106.
Karanikas, N., & Nederend, J. (2018). The controllability classification of safety events and its
application to aviation investigation reports. Safety science, 108, 89-103.
Kelly, D., & Efthymiou, M. (2019). An analysis of human factors in fifty controlled flight into
terrain aviation accidents from 2007 to 2017c. Journal of Safety Research.
Kennedy, K. D., Stephens, C. L., Williams, R. A., & Schutte, P. C. (2017, September). Repeated
Induction of Inattentional Blindness in a Simulated Aviation Environment.
In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting (Vol. 61,
No. 1, pp. 1959-1963). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
Khastgir, S., Birrell, S., Dhadyalla, G., & Jennings, P. (2018, July). Effect of Knowledge of
Automation Capability on Trust and Workload in an Automated Vehicle: A Driving
Simulator Study. In International Conference on Applied Human Factors and
Ergonomics (pp. 410-420). Springer, Cham.
Körber, M., & Bengler, K. (2014, September). Potential individual differences regarding
automation effects in automated driving. In Proceedings of the XV International
Conference on Human Computer Interaction (p. 22). ACM.

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 23
Körber, M., Baseler, E., & Bengler, K. (2018). Introduction matters: Manipulating trust in
automation and reliance in automated driving. Applied ergonomics, 66, 18-31.
Lewis, M., Sycara, K., & Walker, P. (2018). The role of trust in human-robot interaction.
In Foundations of Trusted Autonomy(pp. 135-159). Springer, Cham.
Lin, J., Matthews, G., Wohleber, R., Chiu, C. Y. P., Calhoun, G., Funke, G., & Ruff, H. (2016,
September). Automation reliability and other contextual factors in multi-UAV operator
selection. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual
Meeting (Vol. 60, No. 1, pp. 846-850). Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publications.
Marquez, J. J., Riley, V., & Schutte, P. C. (2018). Human automation interaction. In Space
Safety and Human Performance (pp. 429-467). Butterworth-Heinemann.
McBride, S. E., Rogers, W. A., & Fisk, A. D. (2014). Understanding human management of
automation errors. Theoretical issues in ergonomics science, 15(6), 545-577.
Molesworth, B. R., & Koo, T. T. (2016). The influence of attitude towards individuals’ choice
for a remotely piloted commercial flight: A latent class logit approach. Transportation
Research Part C: Emerging Technologies, 71, 51-62.
Muslim, H., & Itoh, M. (2018). A theoretical framework for designing human-centered
automotive automation systems. Cognition, Technology & Work, 1-13.
Riley, V. (2018). Operator reliance on automation: Theory and data. In Automation and human
performance (pp. 39-56). Routledge.
Rovira, E., Cross, A., Leitch, E., & Bonaceto, C. (2014). Displaying contextual information
reduces the costs of imperfect decision automation in rapid retasking of ISR
assets. Human factors, 56(6), 1036-1049.

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 24
Rusnock, C. F., Boubin, J. G., Giametta, J. J., Goodman, T. J., Hillesheim, A. J., Kim, S., ... &
Watson, M. E. (2016, July). The Role of Simulation in Designing Human-Automation
Systems. In International Conference on Augmented Cognition (pp. 361-370). Springer,
Cham.
Salomon, K. A., & Boudreaux, D. (2016, July). Identification of Future Human-Computer
System Needs in Army Aviation. In International Conference on HCI in Business,
Government, and Organizations (pp. 209-220). Springer, Cham.
Sanchez, J., Rogers, W. A., Fisk, A. D., & Rovira, E. (2014). Understanding reliance on
automation: effects of error type, error distribution, age and experience. Theoretical
Issues in Ergonomics Science, 15(2), 134-160.
Sauer, J., Chavaillaz, A., & Wastell, D. (2016). Experience of automation failures in training:
effects on trust, automation bias, complacency and performance. Ergonomics, 59(6), 767-
780.
Sebok, A., & Wickens, C. D. (2017). Implementing lumberjacks and black swans into model-
based tools to support human–automation interaction. Human factors, 59(2), 189-203.
Strohmeier, M., Schäfer, M., Smith, M., Lenders, V., & Martinovic, I. (2016, May). Assessing
the impact of aviation security on cyber power. In 2016 8th International Conference on
Cyber Conflict (CyCon) (pp. 223-241). IEEE.
Talebpour, A., & Mahmassani, H. S. (2016). Influence of connected and autonomous vehicles on
traffic flow stability and throughput. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging
Technologies, 71, 143-163.

SAFETY PROBLEMS FROM TECHNOLOGY OVER-RELIANT 25
Xiaobin, L., Xinyuan, C., Congchang, Z., & Yang, L. (2017). Influence of full flow coefficient
on output torque of hydraulic motor with inner curve radial piston. Journal of Wuhan
University of Science and Technology, (4), 10.
Yamani, Y., & McCarley, J. S. (2016). Workload capacity: A response time–based measure of
automation dependence. Human factors, 58(3), 462-471.