The Benefits and the Costs of Using Auditory Warning Messages in Dynamic Decision-Making Settings
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The failure to notice critical changes in both visual and auditory scenes may have important consequences for performance in complex dynamic environments, especially those related to security, such as aviation, surveillance during major events, and command and control of emergency response. Previous work has shown that a significant number of situation changes remain undetected by operators in such environments. In the current study, we examined the impact of using auditory warning messages to support the detection of critical situation changes and to a broader extent the decision making required by the environment. Twenty-two participants performed a radar operator task involving multiple subtasks while detecting critical task-related events that were cued by a specific type of audio message. Results showed that about 22% of the critical changes remained undetected by participants, a percentage similar to that found in previous work using visual cues to support change detection. However, we found that audio messages tended to bias threat evaluation toward perceiving objects as more threatening than they were in reality. Such findings revealed both benefits and costs associated with using audio messages to support change detection in complex dynamic environments.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it