Shared control versus traded control in driving: a debate around automation pitfalls

Area of Science:

• Human-automation interaction
• Automated driving systems
• Road safety engineering

Background:

• A key debate in human-automation interaction concerns task allocation: shared control (simultaneous task performance) versus traded control (alternating task performance).
• The automated driving domain presents a critical context for examining these interaction paradigms.
• Historical analysis reveals six common automation pitfalls: loss of awareness, deskilling, unbalanced workload, behavioral adaptation, misuse, and disuse.

Purpose of the Study:

• To critically evaluate shared control and traded control in human-automation interaction within the automated driving context.
• To address the identified pitfalls of automation through the lens of task allocation strategies.
• To determine the optimal control strategy based on environmental complexity.

Main Methods:

• A decade of classroom debates between authors informed the reflections.
• A historical survey of six automation pitfalls was conducted.
• Arguments for and against shared and traded control were presented and rebutted.

Main Results:

• Haptic shared control is proposed as a potential remedy for automation pitfalls.
• Traded control is argued to be more effective for enhancing road safety.
• Shared control and traded control demonstrate superior performance in medium and low environmental complexity, respectively.

Conclusions:

• The choice between shared and traded control in automated driving depends on environmental complexity.
• Understanding the pitfalls of automation is crucial for designing effective human-automation interaction.
• This research provides insights for designers of automation systems to guide their design decisions.