Do concurrent task demands impact the benefit of automation transparency?

Automated decision aids typically improve decision-making, but incorrect advice risks automation misuse or disuse. We examined the novel question of whether increased automation transparency improves the accuracy of automation use under conditions with/without concurrent (non-automated assisted) task demands. Participants completed an uninhabited vehicle (UV) management task whereby they assigned the best UV to complete missions. Automation advised the best UV but was not always correct. Concurrent non-automated task demands decreased the accuracy of automation use, and increased decision time and perceived workload. With no concurrent task demands, increased transparency which provided more information on how the automation made decisions, improved the accuracy of automation use. With concurrent task demands, increased transparency led to higher trust ratings, faster decisions, and a bias towards agreeing with automation. These outcomes indicate increased reliance on highly transparent automation under conditions with concurrent task demands and have potential implications for human-automation teaming design.