Human–Autonomy Teaming: Definitions, Debates, and Directions
Researchers are beginning to transition from studying human–automation interaction to human–autonomy teaming. This distinction has been highlighted in recent literature, and theoretical reasons why the psychological experience of humans interacting with autonomy may vary and affect subsequent collab...
Main Authors: | , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2021-05-01
|
Series: | Frontiers in Psychology |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.589585/full |
id |
doaj-4aa895e7b31e4deea1b790553457e7c6 |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-4aa895e7b31e4deea1b790553457e7c62021-05-28T20:31:32ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782021-05-011210.3389/fpsyg.2021.589585589585Human–Autonomy Teaming: Definitions, Debates, and DirectionsJoseph B. Lyons0Katia Sycara1Michael Lewis2August Capiola3Air Force Research Laboratory, Dayton, OH, United StatesSchool of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, United StatesSchool of Computing and Information, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, United StatesAir Force Research Laboratory, Dayton, OH, United StatesResearchers are beginning to transition from studying human–automation interaction to human–autonomy teaming. This distinction has been highlighted in recent literature, and theoretical reasons why the psychological experience of humans interacting with autonomy may vary and affect subsequent collaboration outcomes are beginning to emerge (de Visser et al., 2018; Wynne and Lyons, 2018). In this review, we do a deep dive into human–autonomy teams (HATs) by explaining the differences between automation and autonomy and by reviewing the domain of human–human teaming to make inferences for HATs. We examine the domain of human–human teaming to extrapolate a few core factors that could have relevance for HATs. Notably, these factors involve critical social elements within teams that are central (as argued in this review) for HATs. We conclude by highlighting some research gaps that researchers should strive toward answering, which will ultimately facilitate a more nuanced and complete understanding of HATs in a variety of real-world contexts.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.589585/fullhuman–autonomy teamautonomyteamhuman factorsrobotics |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Joseph B. Lyons Katia Sycara Michael Lewis August Capiola |
spellingShingle |
Joseph B. Lyons Katia Sycara Michael Lewis August Capiola Human–Autonomy Teaming: Definitions, Debates, and Directions Frontiers in Psychology human–autonomy team autonomy team human factors robotics |
author_facet |
Joseph B. Lyons Katia Sycara Michael Lewis August Capiola |
author_sort |
Joseph B. Lyons |
title |
Human–Autonomy Teaming: Definitions, Debates, and Directions |
title_short |
Human–Autonomy Teaming: Definitions, Debates, and Directions |
title_full |
Human–Autonomy Teaming: Definitions, Debates, and Directions |
title_fullStr |
Human–Autonomy Teaming: Definitions, Debates, and Directions |
title_full_unstemmed |
Human–Autonomy Teaming: Definitions, Debates, and Directions |
title_sort |
human–autonomy teaming: definitions, debates, and directions |
publisher |
Frontiers Media S.A. |
series |
Frontiers in Psychology |
issn |
1664-1078 |
publishDate |
2021-05-01 |
description |
Researchers are beginning to transition from studying human–automation interaction to human–autonomy teaming. This distinction has been highlighted in recent literature, and theoretical reasons why the psychological experience of humans interacting with autonomy may vary and affect subsequent collaboration outcomes are beginning to emerge (de Visser et al., 2018; Wynne and Lyons, 2018). In this review, we do a deep dive into human–autonomy teams (HATs) by explaining the differences between automation and autonomy and by reviewing the domain of human–human teaming to make inferences for HATs. We examine the domain of human–human teaming to extrapolate a few core factors that could have relevance for HATs. Notably, these factors involve critical social elements within teams that are central (as argued in this review) for HATs. We conclude by highlighting some research gaps that researchers should strive toward answering, which will ultimately facilitate a more nuanced and complete understanding of HATs in a variety of real-world contexts. |
topic |
human–autonomy team autonomy team human factors robotics |
url |
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.589585/full |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT josephblyons humanautonomyteamingdefinitionsdebatesanddirections AT katiasycara humanautonomyteamingdefinitionsdebatesanddirections AT michaellewis humanautonomyteamingdefinitionsdebatesanddirections AT augustcapiola humanautonomyteamingdefinitionsdebatesanddirections |
_version_ |
1721422887624114176 |