A systematic review
paperAuthors
Credibility Rating
High quality. Established institution or organization with editorial oversight and accountability.
Rating inherited from publication venue: PubMed Central
Systematic review examining automation bias in clinical decision support systems, identifying how users over-rely on automated systems and factors influencing this tendency—relevant to AI safety concerns about human oversight of AI systems in high-stakes domains.
Paper Details
Metadata
Summary
This systematic review examines automation bias (AB)—the tendency to over-rely on automated systems—with a focus on clinical decision support systems (CDSS) in healthcare. The authors analyzed 74 studies from multiple research fields to assess the frequency and severity of automation bias, identify mediating factors, and evaluate potential interventions. The review finds that user factors (cognitive style, experience), system design characteristics, and attitudinal factors significantly influence automation bias, and discusses related phenomena like automation-induced complacency where users fail to adequately monitor automated outputs.
Cited by 1 page
| Page | Type | Quality |
|---|---|---|
| AI-Driven Institutional Decision Capture | Risk | 73.0 |
Cached Content Preview
Automation bias: a systematic review of frequency, effect mediators, and mitigators - PMC
Skip to main content
Official websites use .gov
A
.gov website belongs to an official
government organization in the United States.
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock (
Lock
Locked padlock icon
) or https:// means you've safely
connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive
information only on official, secure websites.
Search PMC Full-Text Archive
Search in PMC
Journal List
User Guide
PERMALINK
Copy
As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with,
the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health.
Learn more:
PMC Disclaimer
|
PMC Copyright Notice
J Am Med Inform Assoc . 2011 Jun 16;19(1):121–127. doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2011-000089
Automation bias: a systematic review of frequency, effect mediators, and mitigators
Kate Goddard
Kate Goddard
1 Centre for Health Informatics, City University, London, UK
Find articles by Kate Goddard
1, ✉ , Abdul Roudsari
Abdul Roudsari
1 Centre for Health Informatics, City University, London, UK
2 School of Health Information Science, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
Find articles by Abdul Roudsari
1, 2 , Jeremy C Wyatt
Jeremy C Wyatt
3 Institute of Digital Healthcare, University of Warwick, UK
Find articles by Jeremy C Wyatt
3
Author information
Article notes
Copyright and License information
1 Centre for Health Informatics, City University, London, UK
2 School of Health Information Science, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada
3 Institute of Digital Healthcare, University of Warwick, UK
✉ Correspondence to Kate Goddard, Centre for Health Informatics, City University, Northampton Square, London EC1V 0HB, UK; kate.goddard.1@city.ac.uk
✉ Corresponding author.
Received 2010 Dec 17; Accepted 2011 May 17; Issue date 2012 Jan-Feb.
© 2011, Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.
PMC Copyright notice
PMCID: PMC3240751 PMID: 21685142
See " Computer-based safety surveillance and patient-centered health records " on page 1.
Abstract
Automation bias (AB)—the tendency to over-rely on automation—has been studied in
... (truncated, 51 KB total)8b736db3fc699115 | Stable ID: ZmU1NTdiZG