Carl Westin

30 Strategic Conformance: A Literature Survey Decision/ preferred solution Decision-making style Internal & external mental models Communication & interaction style Perceptual mechanisms Increased level of cognitive work Strategic conformance User-centered design Ecology-centered design Direct manipulation Multi-modal systems Legibility principles Motor skill Handling qualities F IGURE 2-2: Levels of human-machine compatibility, and their respective constructs found in CE research, ordered by increased levels of cognitive work. Strategic con- formance can be regarded as a complementary construct that plays an increasingly important role for automation acceptance of advanced automation assuming the role of a decision aid. a decision aid with a polite and friendly communication style (defined as good eti- quette) significantly increased participant’s trust in automation. At the highest level, there is decision-making compatibility, which has only emerged in recent times as machines have become more capable of assuming control over decision-making processes. In two important ways, strategic conformance would extend previous research in compatibility. First, previous research has been limited to exploring compatibility related to overt similarities between automation and human behavior and commu- nication (communication and interaction style level in Figure 2-2). Examples of the latter are human-like robots and anthropomorphism, 115, 116 the computers are social actors paradigm, 117–119 and automation etiquette. 114, 120 Strategic conformance is unique in that it also recognizes the human’s concealed underlying strategies (pro- cess). If the automation suggests a solution that matches the operator’s problem- solving style, the operator is likely to infer that the automation has arrived at the same solution by applying the same rationale. It would “make sense,” and possibly alleviate cognitive workload associated with trying to understand what the automa- tion is doing and why. Second, strategic conformance recognizes individuals’ problem-solving styles. Previous research has assumed that humans, in specific work domains, are suffi- ciently homogeneous as a group and that it is possible and sensible to develop “one-