Automation complacency
The well-documented tendency of human monitors to reduce genuine vigilance toward an automated system that has been reliable, leading to missed failures; the central reason a monitoring routine must be engineered to survive its own operator (Parasuraman and Manzey, 2010).
Defined in 2 GAGE programs, which carry 3 distinct definitions of it. The wording above is taught in AI Literacy & Professional Conduct.
How each discipline defines it
The same term does different work depending on who is using it. These are the definitions as each program teaches them, unedited.
The well-documented tendency of human monitors to reduce genuine vigilance toward an automated system that has been reliable, leading to missed failures; the central reason a monitoring routine must be engineered to survive its own operator (Parasuraman and Manzey, 2010).
The failure mode of augmented work in which the human, trusting a fast and usually-correct tool, stops genuinely reviewing, so a confident-but-wrong AI output passes through with the human's name on it.
The tendency to under-monitor a usually-reliable automated system; established by Parasuraman and Manzey (2010) as a structural feature of attention under limited cognitive resources, present in experts as well as novices, not fixable by simply trying harder.
Where it is taught
The exact lessons this term appears in. The first 7 topics of every program are free with a free account.
- Cognitive Resilience and AI Burnout Prevention · AI in the Workplace and Team Leadership, AI Literacy & Professional Conduct
- Monitoring and Reviewing AI Agent Outputs · Agentic AI and Workforce Integration, AI Literacy & Professional Conduct
- The Taxonomy of Work in an AI Organization: Your Work Taxonomy Map · Workforce and Talent in the AI Era, Business AI Transformation
Terms it appears with
Not an alphabetical neighbourhood: these are the terms taught in the same lessons, ranked by how often they appear together.