Do We Really Need More Stages? Comparing the Effects of Likelihood Alarm Systems and Binary Alarm Systems

• Published in: Human factors 2020-06, Vol.62 (4), p.540-552
• Main Authors: Zirk, Anna, Wiczorek, Rebecca, Manzey, Dietrich
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Alarm systems; Cognitive ability; False alarms; Sensitivity; Space life sciences
• ISSN: 0018-7208; 1547-8181
• DOI: 10.1177/0018720819852023

Objective This research investigates the potential behavioral and performance benefits of a four-stage likelihood alarm system (4-LAS) contrasting a 3-LAS, a binary alarm system with a liberal threshold (lib-BAS), and a BAS with a conservative threshold (con-BAS). Background Prior research has shown performance benefits of 3-LASs over conventional lib-BASs due to more distinct response strategies and better discriminating true from false alerts. This effect might be further enhanced using 4-LASs. However, the increase in stages could cause users to reduce cognitive complexity by responding in the same way to the two lower and the two higher stages, thus treating the 4-LAS like a con-BAS. Method All systems were compared using a dual-task paradigm. Response strategies, number of joint human machine (JHM) false alarms (FAs), misses, and sensitivity were regarded. Results Compared with the lib-BAS, JHM sensitivity only improved with the 4-LAS and the con-BAS. However, the number of JHM misses was lowest for the con-BAS compared with all other systems. Conclusion JHM sensitivity improvements can be achieved by using a 4-LAS, as well as a con-BAS. However, only the latter one may also reduce the number of JHM misses, which is remarkable considering that BASs with conservative thresholds a priori commit more inbuilt misses than other systems. Application Results suggest implementing conservative BASs in multi-task working environments to improve JHM sensitivity and reduce the number of JHM misses. When refraining from designing systems which are miss prone, 4-LASs represent a suitable compromise.