As it can be observed in Figure 2, the cuing effect was modulated by the presentation of the fixation cue, F(1, 14)=17.
0001, indicating a gradual decrease in RT with practice in the task, and a Block x Cuing interaction, F(3, 42)=7.
The Block x Cuing, and the Fixation Cue x Cuing interactions were also significant, F(3, 42)=3.
The analysis revealed main effects of Cuing, F(1, 54) = 17.
There was a two way interaction between Cuing and Distractor group F(1, 54) = 27.
The Cuing X SOA interaction was also significant, F(1, 54) = 19.
This form of attentional tunneling, attributable to cuing, has been replicated by Yeh and Wickens (2001b) and Davison and Wickens (1999).
Here the instance of an automation cuing failure can be categorized into one of three cases: (a) The automation misses an event it should have noted (and fails to provide a cue); (b) the automation incorrectly classifies an event as important (and cues it); and (c) the automation does not cue the location of the event with great precision, indicating only the general area of the event.
At the time of the initial failure of what had previously been a perfect system, the operator will typically be overreliant on the cuing (Parasuraman & Riley, 1997) and may fail to detect the target (Case A: automation miss) or may falsely classify a nontarget as a target (Case B: automation false alarm).
However, Jansen, See, Riegler, and Davis (1999) found that observers' use of cues in target acquisition was unaffected by the cue's accuracy but that cuing prompted faster decision speed.
All these measures are potentially affected by an automated cuing system.
In the present experiment we examine this time course of automation reliance before and after the occurrence of a first failure in a target cuing paradigm.
Our interest in this experiment is the effect on sensitivity and response bias of reliable target cuing, and of users' discovery of - and subsequent adjustment to - cuing unreliability.
The minimal amount of evidence on endogenous versus exogenous auditory spatial cuing suggests that both types may be involved.
The present experiments attempted to resolve these issues by testing whether auditory spatial cuing affects the localization stage of visual search, the identification stage, or both stages by manipulating the density of distractors within the local area around the target and within the entire search field.